KatolaZ <kato...@freaknet.org> wrote: > Just please try to > avoid falling in the same "everybody needs to boot-up in 12 seconds > because high availability requires so" rhetoric championed by > systemd-fanboys.
More to the point, I'd rather have reliability over speed any day. If the system boots reliably in 2 minutes vs "less deterministically" in one then I'll take the 2 minutes. But one trick that the desktop vendors are doing, and I suspect SystemD are copying, is to "fake" a fast boot. By prioritising certain bits, you get the illusion of a fast boot (getting to draw a desktop) - but if you try and actually do anything straight away it "doesn't work" while all those services are starting in the background. I've noticed Win10 is particularly aggressive at this since "time to a desktop" seems to be such a key metric these days. But, if you are going to boot slowly and methodically, it helps if there's signs of progress. There's nothing that gets people impatient better than something that appears to be taking a long time "doing nothing" ! _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
