On Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:27:33 +0200 Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 11:21 AM, Kevin Chadwick <ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk> > wrote: > >> I'd love to see the overall advantages and disadvantages of each of > >> those fleshed out on a page where I can read them > > > > Here's one part > > > > A good design would make the init process which is always running and > > everyone must run. > > > > 1./ Be a small simple binary > > > > 2./ Have no dependencies > > > > 3./ Be easy to follow, fix and lockdown, best fit being interpreted > > languages. > > > > 4./ be as fast as possible > > > > systemd meets 4. Sysvinit meets 1-3 well but OpenBSDs init meets 1-3 > > better > > I agree in general, but systemd doesn't meet #4; we are supposed to > believe that's the case, but does it really? > So... on my c2d (1.8ghz) machine a reboot with initscripts takes about 40s. With systemd it will either take (1) < 40s (2) > 40s. But probably the deviation will not exceed ~5s. Given that... why should I care about speed at all? Again your problem with 300 MHz kernel timer may be real, but is it relevant when talking about an init system? Does it overweigh such pros as deprecation of ck and pm-utils, or ability to lock a user in a cgroup? -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key: 0x164B5A6D Fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
