3 ms·
I don’t think anyone thinks that sysvinit is better than systemd, but RC definitely is.
by mruts 7y ago
I don’t think anyone thinks that sysvinit is better than systemd, but RC definitely is.
- PlutoIsAPlanet 7y agoYou would be surprised.
- krzyk 7y agoActually I do. systemd is too complicated for my needs, maybe it is usefull in some complicated system setups but for me (and probably others) it is too big, too complex and completely unneeded. What was the problem with sysvinit that they tried to fix? I don't see any.
- JdeBP 7y agosystemd was aimed at the problems with Upstart rather than the problems with van Smoorenburg rc. van Smooreburg rc had already been superseded for its creators. Fedora was using Upstart. The problems with van Smoorenburg rc are widely acknowledged, however, and motivated the creation of Upstart, finit, init-ng, and many other softwares; indeed, the problems of System 3/5 init/rc, which van Smoorenburg rc began as a clone of, similarly motivated the creation of the SAF in AT&T Unix System 5 release 4, the Solaris SMF, and the AIX SRC. There is a history of superseding them that goes back for decades. It is clearly wrong to claim that they are without problem. They've been recognized as problematic and people have been replacing them since before Linux was invented. * http://jdebp.uk./FGA/system-5-rc-problems.html http://jdebp.uk./FGA/system-5-rc-problems.html * http://jdebp.uk./FGA/unix-service-access-facility.html http://jdebp.uk./FGA/unix-service-access-facility.html * https://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/ https://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/09/05/0/