| 1 |
On 19/09/14 03:18, Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2014-09-18, Alec Ten Harmsel <alec@××××××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Mark David Dumlao wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> The code is out there. Freely available. Both systemd and sysvinit. |
| 5 |
>>> If you wanted to measure both, you could, literally, in the time it |
| 6 |
>>> took since you first posted in this thread till now you could have |
| 7 |
>>> measured several times and left mean comments about whichever |
| 8 |
>>> system you hated the most. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Unfortunately, the systemd guys keep screaming that systemd is faster, |
| 11 |
>> and burden of proof is on the party that's claiming something. It's not |
| 12 |
>> James'/Volker's responsibility to prove that systemd isn't faster. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I don't understand all the hoopla about systemd being "faster". |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Faster at what? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> Booting? |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> The only Linux systems where I care about boot time are embedded |
| 21 |
> systems which are never going to have the resources needed to run |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
systemd is targeted at cloud systems and fast booting which is where I |
| 24 |
guess redhats focus is these days since they seem to have lost the |
| 25 |
desktop space. The fact that systemd isn't potentially as reliable etc. |
| 26 |
is irrelevant when you are looking at a more disposable cloud model |
| 27 |
where fast start and short life predominate. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
The problem is that systemd is being forced into areas where people |
| 30 |
don't want it (inc. me). |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
BillK |
Archives