18 Sep
2014
18 Sep
'14
8:49 a.m.
From: lisi.reisz(a)gmail.com
To: trinity-users(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:17:02 +0100
Subject: [trinity-users] systemd and sysvinit, a question
Since this list seems prepared to stick to logic, facts and solutions, rather
than heat and emotion, perhaps some kind soul would answer a question for me.
I have no opinion on init systems. I accept what I am given and am grateful,
but ....
If sysvinit is as staggerigly marvellous as it is being painted by some, and
if it was such a near thing that it got dropped as the Debian default init
system, how come the vote was apparently between Upstart and systemd? And
given that it was a vote between Upstart and systemd, why are some people so
up in arms and ranting that sysvinit was dropped by a meaningless margin?
(The chairman's casting vote.) When and how was the decison to drop sysvinit
as the Debian default init system actually taken?
Lisi
Hi Lisi,
As a linux user, I'd say that the init system, as long as it works as it should and
it gets you to your TDE desktop, is not a big matter to the end-user.
Some years ago, changes has been made to accelerate linux boot time. As I understand it,
previously, linux booted up in a very linear dos-like manner, which is one thing after the
other. Changes has been made to launch different services and parts of the system in a
more parallel way, to save some time.
Due to these changes, classic init system were changed for different one.
We don't always remember it, but, as an example, PCLinuxOS 2009 (and older releases
too) took much longer to boot than the ''current'' 2010 and newer
releases, due to changes in the organisation of the system bootup. Also, do you remember
how linux was almost as long to boot than to shut down?
In the end, it doesn't have much negative impact on the end users.
-Alexandre