by Calum » Sat Oct 15, 2005 5:58 am
well, looked at a different way, there's no actual difference between sysv and bsd style init setups, except for the "shape" of the files and directories. one file starts the whole thing off, and then refers to other files, they then refer to each other in whatever order they choose until the system is up under whatever runlevel.
in my opinion a bsd style init is fine, but a sysv init has arranged itself a little more modularly. it seems to me like bsd style init has a unix config file oriented outlook (where files get changed internally) while sysv style init would rather have things be easily removable and addable without needing to change (m)any rc files. Sysv has a more clever (but possibly not more effective) way of dealing with what order things get started in too. doesn't it go by the digits in the filenames to get the order to start things? whereas bsd style init would just go from the top of a config file and work down to the bottom, so the difference to change the order of execution would be either just changing the filenames in a sysv init environment, compared with shifting all the lines up and down inside a file in a bsd style init environment.
You could of course have both, slack does have some files or directories i think which are there to provide the requisites for an application that expects a sysv style init on the system, and aims to give such an application the behaviour it expects. With modern systems like fedora i expect you'd mess up a lot if you tried to convert to a bsd style init setup, but maybe it would be fun to try.
As usual, feel free to correct me anybody, these are only my own observations.