4 ms·
I suggest you reread "Rethinking PID 1": http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/systemd.html Nobody happens across good
by chungy 4y ago
I 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.