It seems that the Linux Foundation has decided that both “systemd” and “segmentation fault” (lol?) are trademarked by them.

  • rhabarba@feddit.deOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    The only dogma systemd has broken is that booting has to be slow, complicated, and unreliable.

    This was a solved problem before systemd was a thing. And, even if we assumed that Upstart (2006), OpenRC (2007) and others wouldn’t have existed in 2010: How often do you need to reboot your system before the intrusiveness of systemd is worth it?

    • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      In Upstart’s readiness protocol, daemons are expected to SIGSTOP themselves to signal readiness to the process supervisor. This design is extremely questionable, to put it politely.

      OpenRC still relies on System V shell scripts, and therefore is not an improvement.

      “[T]he intrusiveness of systemd” means nothing to me. I care about what it can do and how well, not whether it’s liked by change-fearing graybeards.

      The number of reboots required before the effort to learn systemd becomes worth it is approximately 1. Shell-script-based shutdowns frequently hang, and when they don’t, they take 30+ seconds to shut the system down. Systemd can shut the system down in 5 to 10 seconds. Hallelujah and good riddance to what was one of my least favorite parts of the Linux experience.