Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place! |
Notices |
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Are you new to LinuxQuestions.org? Visit the following links:
Site Howto |
Site FAQ |
Sitemap |
Register Now
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
|
|
05-18-2017, 07:53 AM
|
#1
|
Member
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 789
Rep:
|
No longer have /etc/init.d/
Just got a brand new 1&1 Centos 7 VPS from 1&1 last evening. I've never used Centos 7 before, and only have used Centos 6 (both a VPS from phpwebhosting and Ubuntu and Rasputin (only physical machines).
I know longer have the /etc/init.d/ folder, and evidently need to start using systemd.
Is this new server some half baked amateur server, or is this configuration considered normal? The reason I ask is if not normal, I will immediately cancel this VPS, and get one elsewhere.
Thanks
Code:
[michael@localhost init.d]$ pwd
/etc/init.d
[michael@localhost init.d]$ ls -l
total 32
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 15131 Sep 12 2016 functions
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2989 Sep 12 2016 netconsole
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6643 Sep 12 2016 network
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 1160 Apr 12 19:57 README
[michael@localhost init.d]$ cat RE*
You are looking for the traditional init scripts in /etc/rc.d/init.d,
and they are gone?
Here's an explanation on what's going on:
You are running a systemd-based OS where traditional init scripts have
been replaced by native systemd services files. Service files provide
very similar functionality to init scripts. To make use of service
files simply invoke "systemctl", which will output a list of all
currently running services (and other units). Use "systemctl
list-unit-files" to get a listing of all known unit files, including
stopped, disabled and masked ones. Use "systemctl start
foobar.service" and "systemctl stop foobar.service" to start or stop a
service, respectively. For further details, please refer to
systemctl(1).
Note that traditional init scripts continue to function on a systemd
system. An init script /etc/rc.d/init.d/foobar is implicitly mapped
into a service unit foobar.service during system initialization.
Thank you!
Further reading:
man:systemctl(1)
man:systemd(1)
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd-for-admins-3.html
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/Incompatibilities
[michael@localhost init.d]$
|
|
|
05-18-2017, 07:58 AM
|
#2
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 10,892
|
As the description states, "systemd" replaces "init" with a slew of system-management daemons and a completely different process for specifying the startup sequence and so forth. It does not use the "old" files.
|
|
|
05-18-2017, 07:59 AM
|
#3
|
Member
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 789
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs
As the description states, "systemd" replaces "init" with a slew of system-management daemons and a completely different process for specifying the startup sequence and so forth. It does not use the "old" files.
|
And this is not considered a "bad thing", right?
|
|
|
05-18-2017, 08:49 AM
|
#4
|
Senior Member
Registered: Aug 2009
Distribution: Rocky Linux
Posts: 4,792
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotionCommotion
And this is not considered a "bad thing", right?
|
It's consdered "different". Many opponents of systemd accept that it is indeed an improved init system, and that the SysV init that it replaced was in need of replacement. The bigger controversy is all the other places where systemd takes control over system operations and the way many other parts of the system have become dependent on it.
In the end, it is what it is, and it is what RHEL/CentOS 7 and a lot of other distributions are using. You can either learn to get along with it, or seek out one of the remaining distributions that still uses the older init system.
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
05-18-2017, 09:06 AM
|
#5
|
Member
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 789
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Ah, so it is a Centos7 thing and not a VPS provider's tweak. Okay, guess I am going to learn to get along with it.
|
|
|
05-18-2017, 12:32 PM
|
#6
|
LQ Addict
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 19,872
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotionCommotion
guess I am going to learn to get along with it.
|
archlinux has been using systemd for a very long time, and their wiki has a lot to offer:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Systemd
|
|
|
05-18-2017, 08:28 PM
|
#7
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Virginia, USA
Distribution: Slackware, Ubuntu MATE, Mageia, and whatever VMs I happen to be playing with
Posts: 19,590
|
Quote:
And this is not considered a "bad thing", right?
|
If you use the LQ search, you will find a number of threads regarding whether SystemD is a good or bad thing. The primary objection to it is philosophical. Many persons think it violates the " Unix Philosophy." Secondary objections are that, by default, it does not generate traditional log files, though you can install rsyslog, which directs the contents of the SystemD "journals" (that's SystemD for "logs") to /var/log in traditional format. Many distros that use SystemD include rsyslog by default.
Personally, I think another factor in the objection is that persons who are proficient in one thing sometimes don't want to replace it with a new thing that requires them to learn new stuff. I certainly partake of that feeling from time to time.
I have used several distros with SystemD, mostly Debian and Mageia on hardware and CentOS in a VM, and have not yet encountered a problem related to SystemD.
Last edited by frankbell; 05-18-2017 at 10:02 PM.
Reason: Grammar. It matters.
|
|
1 members found this post helpful.
|
05-18-2017, 09:43 PM
|
#8
|
LQ Guru
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 10,892
|
As for me, I have quickly found SystemD to be much more versatile for my purposes. (If I never have to edit a "crontab" again, I'll be a Happy Boy.) Although I happen to think that they wound up biting-off "more than they really needed to chew," there is now much more fine-grained control over both the startup sequence and the regularly-scheduled tasks that all of our systems need to run.
The collection of processes that make up this new system are aware of one another, and can talk to one another. You now have far more sophisticated options than either inittab or crontab(s) could ever give you. And, if you're managing a group of machines, you have more options than you ever had.
Quite frankly, "I've been missing this functionality from Linux for a long time." Both Windows and OS/X ... and mini/mainframe operating systems, too ... have had analogous features for years. With Linux, very-important as it had become to each and every one of us, "we had no choice but to improvise," because the available facilities were (quite frankly ...) so primitive.
Every "shop" I've ever worked with had been obliged (by necessity) to come up with a slightly- different way to "improvise," and most of them were not that satisfactory. Now (IMHO™ ...), we [finally ...] have a much-enhanced set of capabilities that is much more in-keeping with what [most ...] other operating environments have been offering. And, all of it has been standardized.
I needed what this new system offers, and I'm therefore grateful to have it.
(And yet, I think it's also totally cool that, with Linux, "you still have a choice!" If you want to, you can customize e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g(!) about this operating system.)
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 05-18-2017 at 09:51 PM.
|
|
|
05-19-2017, 12:48 AM
|
#9
|
Member
Registered: Aug 2012
Posts: 789
Original Poster
Rep:
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by frankbell
Personally, I think another factor in the objection is that persons who are proficient in one thing sometimes don't want to replace it with a new thing that requires them to learn new stuff. I certainly partake of that feeling from time to time.
|
Fortunately or not fortunately, I am not proficient enough to have that problem.
That being said, a while back I made a decision to never do the standard Centos "server blabla start", and always use "/etc/init/blabla".
Guess I am a little sad...
|
|
|
05-19-2017, 03:09 AM
|
#10
|
Senior Member
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Distribution: CentOS 6/7
Posts: 1,375
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotionCommotion
That being said, a while back I made a decision to never do the standard Centos "server blabla start", and always use "/etc/init/blabla".
|
A small price to pay, to use a system that actually knows if its services are actually running or not and has the ability to handle onFailure events, to do things such as sending e-mails or restarting the failed service.
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:34 PM.
|
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.
|
Latest Threads
LQ News
|
|