4 ms·

That's good that you didn't experience any bumps in the road, but did you notice the supposed benefits of systemd yet? Namely faster startup times?

by Touche 11y ago

chimeracoder 11y ago
> That's good that you didn't experience any bumps in the road, but did you notice the supposed benefits of systemd yet? Namely faster startup times? I have, for what it's worth, but it's worth noting that the biggest benefits of systemd are invisible to end-users. Startup time is the one mentioned most frequently because it's one of the few that's directly observable by end-users, not because it's the most important. For example, systemd makes it much easier to write services (both system and user services), and it definitely has delivered on this promise, since I take advantage of it frequently. Most users still don't have a need for this, though for the ones that do, it's now several orders of magnitude easier to write basic services. But more importantly, systemd is far easier to maintain. That's the real reason distros like Arch switched so rapidly[0]; it wasn't part of some vast systemd conspiracy. They were willing to support sysvinit as long as there were people to maintain them, but it turns out that almost nobody wanted to maintain it. And since it's a volunteer/community-run distro, you can't exactly force people to maintain code they don't want to. There was one guy who posted to the mailing list and was very adamant about providing an AUR package for it, but last I checked, it didn't have much traction. [0] Arch switched back in 2012, long before most other distros. And they deprecated sysvinit within less than a year - far faster than they originally planned - for the above reasons.
- vezzy-fnord 11y ago
  Please stop perpetuating the false dichotomy of systemd versus sysvinit, it gets tiring. [1] One does not "write services" in systemd. One configures manifests for services in the unit file format, which is internally translated into a Unit object, used for representing various system resources, including services (service actions being queued as another internal unit type, that of jobs). "systemd is far easier to maintain" is not measurable in any way. In fact, given it expects a particular FHS [2], has a lot in the way of needing optimization [3], has a rapid pace of development, adds a complicated transactional dependency system based on seven different job queuing modes and undocumented heuristics, the evidence would point that it is not. Indeed, I do recall Dave Reisner of Arch Linux complaining about systemd's pace and its poor test suite, requiring lots of patching. [1] http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/ http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/ [2] http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy.html http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarc... [3] https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/Optimizations/ https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/Optimizati...
  - chimeracoder 11y ago
    > Please stop perpetuating the false dichotomy of systemd versus sysvinit, it gets tiring. It's hardly a false dichotomy to compare what a distro was using previously to what they are using today, which is what I did (and what OP asked for). > Indeed, I do recall Dave Reisner of Arch Linux complaining about systemd's pace and its poor test suite, requiring lots of patching. I didn't say it was perfect, and in fact, I have a long list of complaints about the initial switch in Arch (though not Debian). That doesn't negate the point that the reason Arch (and other distros) dropped support for sysvinit was that there ended up being insufficient interest from maintainers in maintaining it.
jordigh 11y ago
I certainly did. systemd has been pretty blissful for me so far.
jefurii 11y ago
> did you notice the supposed benefits of systemd yet? Namely faster startup times? Given that I rarely reboot my systems, no. I spend most of my time using my systems, not booting them. [update: clarification, additional snarkiness]
- fluidcruft 11y ago
  So you don't use a laptop, or if you do you treat it like an always on mainframe. Good for you.
  - digi_owl 11y ago
    You suspend a laptop, you do not reboot it.
    - fluidcruft 11y ago
      My laptop boots in two or three sec, so I typicaly just shut it down.
baldfat 11y ago
Main reason there is a Systemd is NOT for users. They didn't switch to Systemd for faster boot times. They made the switch to make life as a developer easier. As a user Ivastly PREFER the syntax and process handling of Systemd. I miss the plain text logs but no big deal.
justinsaccount 11y ago
http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html Myth: systemd is about speed. Yes, systemd is fast (A pretty complete userspace boot-up in ~900ms, anyone?), but that's primarily just a side-effect of doing things right. In fact, we never really sat down and optimized the last tiny bit of performance out of systemd. Instead, we actually frequently knowingly picked the slightly slower code paths in order to keep the code more readable. This doesn't mean being fast was irrelevant for us, but reducing systemd to its speed is certainly quite a misconception, since that is certainly not anywhere near the top of our list of goals.
- falcolas 11y ago
  Might want to read an even earlier post by the same gent. http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd.html http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd.html Speed has always been a major motivator driving systemd. Not the only driver, but it's the first thing that's listed as a gripe with System V Init. It may not still be the biggest priority, but to say it was never a priority is re-writing history.
- Touche 11y ago
  > Myth: systemd is about speed. Then what is it about?
  - digi_owl 11y ago
    Kernel encirclement and owning userspace. Basically the biggest players in all this has long bellyached about fragmentation in the Linux ecosystem, and preached the wonders of monoculture (aka Windows and OSX).

That's good that you didn't experience any bumps in the road, but did you notice the supposed benefits of systemd yet? Namely faster startup times?

by Touche 11y ago

That's good that you didn't experience any bumps in the road, but did you notice the supposed benefits of systemd yet? Namely faster startup times?

chimeracoder 11y ago

> That's good that you didn't experience any bumps in the road, but did you notice the supposed benefits of systemd yet? Namely faster startup times? I have, for what it's worth, but it's worth noting that the biggest benefits of systemd are invisible to end-users. Startup time is the one mentioned most frequently because it's one of the few that's directly observable by end-users, not because it's the most important. For example, systemd makes it much easier to write services (both system and user services), and it definitely has delivered on this promise, since I take advantage of it frequently. Most users still don't have a need for this, though for the ones that do, it's now several orders of magnitude easier to write basic services. But more importantly, systemd is far easier to maintain. That's the real reason distros like Arch switched so rapidly[0]; it wasn't part of some vast systemd conspiracy. They were willing to support sysvinit as long as there were people to maintain them, but it turns out that almost nobody wanted to maintain it. And since it's a volunteer/community-run distro, you can't exactly force people to maintain code they don't want to. There was one guy who posted to the mailing list and was very adamant about providing an AUR package for it, but last I checked, it didn't have much traction. [0] Arch switched back in 2012, long before most other distros. And they deprecated sysvinit within less than a year - far faster than they originally planned - for the above reasons.

vezzy-fnord 11y ago
Please stop perpetuating the false dichotomy of systemd versus sysvinit, it gets tiring. [1] One does not "write services" in systemd. One configures manifests for services in the unit file format, which is internally translated into a Unit object, used for representing various system resources, including services (service actions being queued as another internal unit type, that of jobs). "systemd is far easier to maintain" is not measurable in any way. In fact, given it expects a particular FHS [2], has a lot in the way of needing optimization [3], has a rapid pace of development, adds a complicated transactional dependency system based on seven different job queuing modes and undocumented heuristics, the evidence would point that it is not. Indeed, I do recall Dave Reisner of Arch Linux complaining about systemd's pace and its poor test suite, requiring lots of patching. [1] http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/ http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/ [2] http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarchy.html http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/file-hierarc... [3] https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/Optimizations/ https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/Optimizati...
- chimeracoder 11y ago
  > Please stop perpetuating the false dichotomy of systemd versus sysvinit, it gets tiring. It's hardly a false dichotomy to compare what a distro was using previously to what they are using today, which is what I did (and what OP asked for). > Indeed, I do recall Dave Reisner of Arch Linux complaining about systemd's pace and its poor test suite, requiring lots of patching. I didn't say it was perfect, and in fact, I have a long list of complaints about the initial switch in Arch (though not Debian). That doesn't negate the point that the reason Arch (and other distros) dropped support for sysvinit was that there ended up being insufficient interest from maintainers in maintaining it.

jordigh 11y ago

I certainly did. systemd has been pretty blissful for me so far.

jefurii 11y ago

> did you notice the supposed benefits of systemd yet? Namely faster startup times? Given that I rarely reboot my systems, no. I spend most of my time using my systems, not booting them. [update: clarification, additional snarkiness]

fluidcruft 11y ago
So you don't use a laptop, or if you do you treat it like an always on mainframe. Good for you.
- digi_owl 11y ago
  You suspend a laptop, you do not reboot it.
  - fluidcruft 11y ago
    My laptop boots in two or three sec, so I typicaly just shut it down.

baldfat 11y ago

Main reason there is a Systemd is NOT for users. They didn't switch to Systemd for faster boot times. They made the switch to make life as a developer easier. As a user Ivastly PREFER the syntax and process handling of Systemd. I miss the plain text logs but no big deal.

justinsaccount 11y ago

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html Myth: systemd is about speed. Yes, systemd is fast (A pretty complete userspace boot-up in ~900ms, anyone?), but that's primarily just a side-effect of doing things right. In fact, we never really sat down and optimized the last tiny bit of performance out of systemd. Instead, we actually frequently knowingly picked the slightly slower code paths in order to keep the code more readable. This doesn't mean being fast was irrelevant for us, but reducing systemd to its speed is certainly quite a misconception, since that is certainly not anywhere near the top of our list of goals.

falcolas 11y ago
Might want to read an even earlier post by the same gent. http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd.html http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd.html Speed has always been a major motivator driving systemd. Not the only driver, but it's the first thing that's listed as a gripe with System V Init. It may not still be the biggest priority, but to say it was never a priority is re-writing history.
Touche 11y ago
> Myth: systemd is about speed. Then what is it about?
- digi_owl 11y ago
  Kernel encirclement and owning userspace. Basically the biggest players in all this has long bellyached about fragmentation in the Linux ecosystem, and preached the wonders of monoculture (aka Windows and OSX).