On 2013-03-27, Kevin Chadwick <ma1l1i...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> The real drive behind systemd is enterprise cloud type computing for
> Red Hat. The rest is snake oil and much of the features already exist
> without systemd. With more snake oil of promises of faster boot up on a
> portion of the code which is already fast and gains you maybe two
> seconds.
I'm not trying to fan the flames: I'm genuinely confused...
I just don't get the whole "parallel startup for faster boot thing".
Most of my machines just don't boot up often enough for a few seconds
or even tens of seconds to matter at all.
It seems to me that starting things in parallel would be inherintly
much more difficult, bug-prone, and hard to troubleshoot.
Even on my laptop, which does get booted more than once every month or
two, openrc is plenty fast enough.
Are there people who reboot their machines every few minutes and
therefore need to shave a few seconds off their boot time?
I can see how boot time matters for small embedded systems (routers,
firewalls, etc.) that need to be up and running quickly after a power
outage, but they're probably even less likely to be running systemd
than desktops or servers.
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! Where's th' DAFFY
at DUCK EXHIBIT??
gmail.com
