LinuxQuestions.org
Latest LQ Deal: Complete CCNA, CCNP & Red Hat Certification Training Bundle
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 06-21-2018, 04:54 PM   #1
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware and Debian
Posts: 536

Rep: Reputation: 131Reputation: 131
openrc vs sysvinit reboot time on Slackware Virtual Machines


A timed and synchronised reboot of two identical virtual machines; one with the default sysvinit init (hostname: sysvinit) and another with openrc init (hostname: darkstar).

It was assured that the host and virtual guests were synchronised via NTP, and they rebooted at 21:39. Simultaneously a timer was triggered via a shell script as a visual aid.

It can be seen that the openrc machine shutdowns in 5 seconds, while the sysvinit machine takes 14 seconds. Booting up time however is much closer. The openrc machine takes 14 seconds, while sysvinit takes about 16 seconds.

See here: https://youtu.be/E8p_Z1ssx8w
 
Old 06-22-2018, 03:20 AM   #2
Darth Vader
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Romania
Distribution: DARKSTAR Linux 2008.1
Posts: 2,727

Rep: Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231Reputation: 1231
And the point is?

IF even in the far future the Slackware will change its init system, I bet on a switching to SystemD, because it will became a hard requirement for major package series.

But not keep your breath for...

Last edited by Darth Vader; 06-22-2018 at 03:22 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-22-2018, 04:01 AM   #3
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,098

Rep: Reputation: 445Reputation: 445Reputation: 445Reputation: 445Reputation: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
IF even in the far future the Slackware will change its init system, I bet on a switching to SystemD, because it will became a hard requirement for major package series.
 
Old 06-22-2018, 04:21 AM   #4
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,444
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisAbela View Post
A timed and synchronised reboot of two identical virtual machines; one with the default sysvinit init (hostname: sysvinit) and another with openrc init (hostname: darkstar).

It was assured that the host and virtual guests were synchronised via NTP, and they rebooted at 21:39. Simultaneously a timer was triggered via a shell script as a visual aid.

It can be seen that the openrc machine shutdowns in 5 seconds, while the sysvinit machine takes 14 seconds. Booting up time however is much closer. The openrc machine takes 14 seconds, while sysvinit takes about 16 seconds.

See here: https://youtu.be/E8p_Z1ssx8w
The problem is Slackware doesn't exactly use sysvinit. It's used to an extent for application purposes (shutdown, reboot, runlevels, etc), but Slackware uses an init system closer to a bsdinit stylization. Really, Slackware's init is unique in many aspects.

OpenRC has been added though via a few Slackbuilds which has been very interesting and useful as a cleaner alternative to systemd due to the hard pressing of packages linking to and against it. Now when I have used it, OpenRC that is, and I do use it now exclusively with Slackware since it was offered, it is fairly good at what it does, but I'm still not sure if it's ready for primetime any time soon. I don't care about the speeds at which it boots or shuts down, I'm more towards it booting properly, which is the best way to do things because Slackware for some is a server OS not just a desktop and servers have to be accurate in booting properly, not just faster. OpenRC is faster granted, and it does offer some automatic restarting of daemons(services) which is handy, but I'm still skeptical of it being a long term solution here for anything outside of a desktop environment. Gentoo people may say otherwise, but I'm not sold on Gentoo by any means. I will say Aaditya's work with the OpenRC packages has been phenomenal to offer what has been available.

The only person who is going to say if the init system will change is Patrick. So far, it looks like we are keeping the traditional init system Slackware uses, and will for a very long time, even if the guiding hand of Slackware is passed to the next person that has yet to be named.

Last edited by ReaperX7; 06-22-2018 at 04:39 AM.
 
5 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-24-2018, 01:34 AM   #5
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware and Debian
Posts: 536

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 131Reputation: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Vader View Post
And the point is?

IF even in the far future the Slackware will change its init system, I bet on a switching to SystemD, because it will became a hard requirement for major package series.

But not keep your breath for...
I appreciate how a clip that seems to disappoint with its objectivity, has been so quickly lit up with a very daring prediction. The post stated the obtained results. If we are to attribute a point to a opinion, I would say that I found OpenRC pointless. A small gain in shutting down is paid by some complexity. Take the NTP configuration file (/etc/conf.d/ntp-client) for example.

Quote:
# /etc/conf.d/ntp-client

# Command to run to set the clock initially
# Most people should just leave this line alone ...
# however, if you know what you're doing, and you
# want to use ntpd to set the clock, change this to 'ntpd'
NTPCLIENT_CMD="ntpdate"

# Options to pass to the above command
# This default setting should work fine but you should
# change the default 'pool.ntp.org' to something closer
# to your machine. See http://www.pool.ntp.org/ or
# try running `netselect -s 3 pool.ntp.org`.
NTPCLIENT_OPTS="-s -b -u \
0.gentoo.pool.ntp.org 1.gentoo.pool.ntp.org \
2.gentoo.pool.ntp.org 3.gentoo.pool.ntp.org"

# If you use hostnames above, then you should depend on dns
# being up & running before we try to run. Otherwise, you
# can disable this.
rc_use="dns"
However I did enjoy following the wiki and recording the results. The timing results may disappointing on Slackware because OpenRC does not replace sysvinit.

Last edited by ChrisAbela; 06-24-2018 at 01:42 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-24-2018, 01:41 AM   #6
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware and Debian
Posts: 536

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 131Reputation: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
The problem is Slackware doesn't exactly use sysvinit. It's used to an extent for application purposes (shutdown, reboot, runlevels, etc), but Slackware uses an init system closer to a bsdinit stylization. Really, Slackware's init is unique in many aspects.

OpenRC has been added though via a few Slackbuilds which has been very interesting and useful as a cleaner alternative to systemd due to the hard pressing of packages linking to and against it. Now when I have used it, OpenRC that is, and I do use it now exclusively with Slackware since it was offered, it is fairly good at what it does, but I'm still not sure if it's ready for primetime any time soon. I don't care about the speeds at which it boots or shuts down, I'm more towards it booting properly, which is the best way to do things because Slackware for some is a server OS not just a desktop and servers have to be accurate in booting properly, not just faster. OpenRC is faster granted, and it does offer some automatic restarting of daemons(services) which is handy, but I'm still skeptical of it being a long term solution here for anything outside of a desktop environment. Gentoo people may say otherwise, but I'm not sold on Gentoo by any means. I will say Aaditya's work with the OpenRC packages has been phenomenal to offer what has been available.

The only person who is going to say if the init system will change is Patrick. So far, it looks like we are keeping the traditional init system Slackware uses, and will for a very long time, even if the guiding hand of Slackware is passed to the next person that has yet to be named.
/sbin/init is in the sysvinit package. I admire Gentoo, but I tend to prefer distros that can be deployed on servers, like Slackware, Debian and Centos. I like Slackware's init system, but I would like to see more options, like runit and systemd, even if via a community effort.
 
Old 06-24-2018, 05:34 AM   #7
Didier Spaier
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slint64-14.2.1 on Lenovo Thinkpad W520
Posts: 8,594

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisAbela View Post
I like Slackware's init system, but I would like to see more options, like runit and systemd, even if via a community effort.
Well, you can have systemd thanks to bartgymnast. Eic Hameleers provides all that is needed to build a live iSO including it, cf. https://docs.slackware.com/slackware...k#iso_variants
And a runit SlackBuild is available @ https://slackbuilds.org thanks to David Miller.

Feel free to provide more options

Last edited by Didier Spaier; 06-24-2018 at 05:35 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 06-25-2018, 01:47 AM   #8
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware and Debian
Posts: 536

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 131Reputation: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
Feel free to provide more options
I did not see that coming . Thanks for the encouragement and for alienbob's link. I'll have a look.
 
Old 10-16-2018, 04:20 AM   #9
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware and Debian
Posts: 536

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 131Reputation: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
Well, you can have systemd thanks to bartgymnast. Eic Hameleers provides all that is needed to build a live iSO including it, cf. https://docs.slackware.com/slackware...k#iso_variants
And a runit SlackBuild is available @ https://slackbuilds.org thanks to David Miller.

Feel free to provide more options
I was not happy with the runit SBo slackbuild, so I wrote mine: https://gitlab.com/chrisabela/runit.git
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-16-2018, 05:51 AM   #10
Lysander666
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2017
Location: London
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 + Xfce
Posts: 795
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
The only person who is going to say if the init system will change is Patrick. So far, it looks like we are keeping the traditional init system Slackware uses, and will for a very long time, even if the guiding hand of Slackware is passed to the next person that has yet to be named.
I can't see it changing any time soon, there is no need. MX Linux, Puppy, PCLinuxOS, antiX et al use SysV. It's an incredibly reliable process. Anyone who is making a mention of even the possibility that Slackware would move to systemd is just trolling [sorry, Darth]. If things work for Slackware, they stay as they are, just look at the installer.

Patrick has always been skeptical at best about systemd. I also remember Eric saying that he would be fight to keep it out of the OS [I think he might be spared that fight though]. It's generally accepted that once systemd gets into an OS, it's not getting out. It's so flagrantly against Slackware's ethic that a debate on it is largely futile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
I don't care about the speeds at which it boots or shuts down, I'm more towards it booting properly, which is the best way to do things because Slackware for some is a server OS not just a desktop and servers have to be accurate in booting properly, not just faster.
Indeed, booting with SysV takes literally less than a minute even on a slow system. It's absolutely nothing, and not worth the compromise at all of a few extra seconds for stability. Make some coffee.

Last edited by Lysander666; 10-16-2018 at 06:06 AM.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-16-2018, 07:01 AM   #11
ChrisAbela
Member
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Malta
Distribution: Slackware and Debian
Posts: 536

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 131Reputation: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lysander666 View Post
I can't see it changing any time soon, there is no need. MX Linux, Puppy, PCLinuxOS, antiX et al use SysV. It's an incredibly reliable process. Anyone who is making a mention of even the possibility that Slackware would move to systemd is just trolling [sorry, Darth]. If things work for Slackware, they stay as they are, just look at the installer.

Patrick has always been skeptical at best about systemd. I also remember Eric saying that he would be fight to keep it out of the OS [I think he might be spared that fight though]. It's generally accepted that once systemd gets into an OS, it's not getting out. It's so flagrantly against Slackware's ethic that a debate on it is largely futile.



Indeed, booting with SysV takes literally less than a minute even on a slow system. It's absolutely nothing, and not worth the compromise at all of a few extra seconds for stability. Make some coffee.
I really wish this thread does not degrade to another SystemD post, so please let's keep the discussion sterile from emotions. I am not authority on SystemD and init in general, but SysD looks too complex and intrusive for my taste. Yet SysV is outdated because it does not monitor and restart services that die out. This is analogous to the LILO/GRUB argument, and I expect Slackware to keep SysV.

On the other hand runit is relatively simple, totally innocuous, powerful and good neighbour to SysV. Some distributions have been built on it and they are making headway.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-16-2018, 07:18 AM   #12
Didier Spaier
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Paris, France
Distribution: Slint64-14.2.1 on Lenovo Thinkpad W520
Posts: 8,594

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lysander666 View Post
It's so flagrantly against Slackware's ethic that a debate on it is largely futile.
I find weird to associate words like philosophy or ethic to a Linux distribution, and anyway let Pat speak for himself about that if he wants to (although he doesn't seem to be much interested by threads about the respective merits of init systems).

So yes, I agree with Chris, let not derail this thread. Incidentally, the post you answered is almost four months old.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-19-2018, 09:05 PM   #13
ReaperX7
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2011
Location: California
Distribution: Slackware64-Current
Posts: 6,444
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013Reputation: 2013
The Runit package is a mixed bag because there are no runit script sets available officially for Slackware or the much needed extra system utilities. Plus, runit has been updated since the last SBO release to 2.1.2 which has a few bug fixes and updates to the script handling system, the SBo package is far from a viable kit.

Runit for Slackware would effectively require a new pause binary (required for delaying script execution phases), stage 1~3 boot and shutdown/reboot scripts (along with any various staged boot scripts also I have a working model in Runit-for-LFS), init mode changing scripts, a new halt and shutdown binaries (also which I do have as part of Runit-for-LFS to replace sysvinit), new scripts to enable/disable services, as well as a collection of service scripts and log collection scripts (most of which have to be written specifically to the distribution). In short Runit would be a lot of work, if not completely too much work. You're more than welcome to use Runit-for-LFS's init-shim kit to get any missing tools from sysvinit replaced, but the rest will be on you.

VoidLinux uses Runit if you want to have a look into it.

If anything, Aaditya's OpenRC and Bartgymnist's systemd are as close to viable alternatives as you will get.

Last edited by ReaperX7; 10-19-2018 at 09:07 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-20-2018, 05:58 AM   #14
Lysander666
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2017
Location: London
Distribution: Slackware 14.2 + Xfce
Posts: 795
Blog Entries: 1

Rep: Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684Reputation: 684
Quote:
Originally Posted by Didier Spaier View Post
I find weird to associate words like philosophy or ethic to a Linux distribution, and anyway let Pat speak for himself about that if he wants to (although he doesn't seem to be much interested by threads about the respective merits of init systems).

So yes, I agree with Chris, let not derail this thread. Incidentally, the post you answered is almost four months old.
Well, the thread has been bumped again [for reference, it was Chris who originally mini-necro'd it]. I should point out that philosophies are what underpin and, to some extent, create Linux distributions. Slackware's philosophy is to be as Unix-like as possible, Debian's is about free software. The Slackware site has a small section titled The Slackware Philosophy, as does Slackdocs. The same for Debian's official site and its Wiki. I understand if you find it strange to associate such words with the distros, but they are a very important part of their raison d'Ítre. The philosophy of a distro can be one of the key defining features that differentiates it from others and those of other corporations.
 
2 members found this post helpful.
Old 10-20-2018, 12:38 PM   #15
aaditya
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2013
Location: India
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 162
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReaperX7 View Post
The Runit package is a mixed bag because there are no runit script sets available officially for Slackware or the much needed extra system utilities. Plus, runit has been updated since the last SBO release to 2.1.2 which has a few bug fixes and updates to the script handling system, the SBo package is far from a viable kit.

Runit for Slackware would effectively require a new pause binary (required for delaying script execution phases), stage 1~3 boot and shutdown/reboot scripts (along with any various staged boot scripts also I have a working model in Runit-for-LFS), init mode changing scripts, a new halt and shutdown binaries (also which I do have as part of Runit-for-LFS to replace sysvinit), new scripts to enable/disable services, as well as a collection of service scripts and log collection scripts (most of which have to be written specifically to the distribution). In short Runit would be a lot of work, if not completely too much work. You're more than welcome to use Runit-for-LFS's init-shim kit to get any missing tools from sysvinit replaced, but the rest will be on you.

VoidLinux uses Runit if you want to have a look into it.

If anything, Aaditya's OpenRC and Bartgymnist's systemd are as close to viable alternatives as you will get.
Hi there!

One thing I would like to mention is that OpenRC supports integration with runit. So one can have the benefits of OpenRC (service management) AND runit (service supervision)!

Its a little rough around the edges, but works. To know more, check out the runit guide.
For some samples, check out openrc-runit-services (not production ready, caution advised!)

P.S.
Thanks ReaperX7 for the plug :-) Thanks to the OP for his efforts and the contributors in this thread.

Last edited by aaditya; 10-20-2018 at 01:02 PM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[SOLVED] Does Slackware tell qemu/kvm virtual machines to shutdown? Altiris Slackware 6 08-26-2016 03:13 PM
SysVinit vs OpenRC vs systemd vs other init system cristi92b Linux - Newbie 2 01-07-2013 04:02 AM
Virtual Machines are not appearing in Virtual Manager after reboot the RHEL5.5 Serve Shanker.K Linux - Newbie 7 04-11-2012 07:20 AM
Dividing cpu time between Virtual Machines spin_ro Linux - Virtualization and Cloud 2 02-17-2010 08:40 AM
How to extend the poweroff and reboot process? (without using sysvinit) sanitynotvanity Linux From Scratch 2 08-13-2009 10:57 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:36 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration