2 ms·
Faster boot was most certainly not a side-effect but instead it was the inspiration and drive behind systemd development. The prime goal of the original develop
by Maursault 4y ago
Faster boot was most certainly not a side-effect but instead it was the inspiration and drive behind systemd development. The prime goal of the original developers in parallel initializations was more efficient processing so booting would be fast. If anything, the design was a side-effect of the faster boot agenda, not the other way around.
- chungy 4y agoI suggest you reread "Rethinking PID 1": http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html Nobody happens across good design as a side-effect of going fast. It's much the other way around.
- Maursault 4y ago> Nobody happens across good design as a side-effect of going fast. Straw man. What I argued, and what is the case, is that the developers wanted faster boot; that was the motivational spark behind systemd, not good design. The design followed in order to achieve the faster boot, thus the design can be seen as a side-effect of the faster boot agenda. The subject of speed is dominant in the document you cited: "As mentioned, the central responsibility of an init system is to bring up userspace. And a good init system does that fast.... For a fast and efficient boot-up two things are crucial... and hence the overall start-up time minimized." It is obsessed with boot time. As I stated, that is the foundational goal of systemd, reducing the time it takes to reboot.