On Tue, 05 Aug 2014, Slavko wrote: > To be precise, i often read about these things: monolitic, binary > files and boot speed. I don't like first two and i am not interested > in latest.
These are just accessible reasons. The main reason that I personally voted for systemd over sysv is because systemd (and upstart) provide correct boot sequencing in complex boot situations. For example, if you're using iscsi, and need to start a daemon after the network is up, iscsi is connected, lvm has resynced, and the appropriate filesystems are mounted, this is trivial using systemd or upstart, but very difficult using sysv.[1] The other reason is we also get rid of thousands of lines of difficult-to-maintain boilerplate in init scripts. While sysv may be easier to debug in simple systems, there's a reason why none of the CTTE members (myself included) voted for it. 1: Not impossible, but you basically end up replicating a dependency boot system in shell, and necessarily introduce brittleness and delays. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com "What, now?" "Soon equates to good, later to worse, Uagen Zlepe, scholar. Therefore, immediacy." -- Iain M. Banks _Look to Windward_ p 213 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140805161715.gv12...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
