1 |
On 2013-03-27, Kevin Chadwick <ma1l1ists@××××××××.uk> wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> The real drive behind systemd is enterprise cloud type computing for |
4 |
> Red Hat. The rest is snake oil and much of the features already exist |
5 |
> without systemd. With more snake oil of promises of faster boot up on a |
6 |
> portion of the code which is already fast and gains you maybe two |
7 |
> seconds. |
8 |
|
9 |
I'm not trying to fan the flames: I'm genuinely confused... |
10 |
|
11 |
I just don't get the whole "parallel startup for faster boot thing". |
12 |
Most of my machines just don't boot up often enough for a few seconds |
13 |
or even tens of seconds to matter at all. |
14 |
|
15 |
It seems to me that starting things in parallel would be inherintly |
16 |
much more difficult, bug-prone, and hard to troubleshoot. |
17 |
|
18 |
Even on my laptop, which does get booted more than once every month or |
19 |
two, openrc is plenty fast enough. |
20 |
|
21 |
Are there people who reboot their machines every few minutes and |
22 |
therefore need to shave a few seconds off their boot time? |
23 |
|
24 |
I can see how boot time matters for small embedded systems (routers, |
25 |
firewalls, etc.) that need to be up and running quickly after a power |
26 |
outage, but they're probably even less likely to be running systemd |
27 |
than desktops or servers. |
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Where's th' DAFFY |
31 |
at DUCK EXHIBIT?? |
32 |
gmail.com |