On 08/11/2012 02:11 PM, Lukas Jirkovsky wrote:
On 11 August 2012 19:14, Baho Utot <baho-u...@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2012 12:22 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
I would be surprised if a systemd-based system requires more resources
than a sysvinit-based one, but that is of course something one would
have to measure for each particular use-case.
There are lots of systemd-based embedded systems cropping up (the
embedded world seems more excited about sysntemd than the desktop
world). The aim of systemd is to work on anything from embedded, via
desktop to servers.
-t
I am not looking at this from an systemd point of view.
My point is the constant bloat with software today. Theses bloated packages
will not fit/function on hand held devices.
Is it not more sensible to build small apps that do one or two things well
then bloated apps that try to do 25 things unwell?
Systemd is broken into multiple small utilities (see eg. systemd-tools
that are used by initscripts already) that does one thing, so it's not
one big scary binary that does everything.
systemd is one source distributed package
arch split the package into the multiples you see here.
In fact I believe* systemd is more suited for embedded devices than
the current initscripts. Systemd is a bunch of small binaries that
should be fast to execute in contrary to interpreting piles of bash
scripts.
It doesn't run on my android device nor would it be needed or required.
