| |||||||||||||
LPC: Booting and systemdLPC: Booting and systemdPosted Sep 15, 2011 7:08 UTC (Thu) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: LPC: Booting and systemd by mezcalero Parent article: LPC: Booting and systemd
Oh, that's nothing. sysvinit beats systemd hollow with, uh, one manpage.
Um.
(Log in to post comments)
LPC: Booting and systemd Posted Sep 15, 2011 8:50 UTC (Thu) by jengelh (subscriber, #33263) [Link]
That may work towards the claim "systemd is bloated". systemd does so much more over sysvinit, having a larger bug surface.
LPC: Booting and systemd Posted Sep 15, 2011 22:24 UTC (Thu) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]
I highly doubt that. systemd is big but it's all in one process. No single human on this planet understands all of modern sysvinit.
LPC: Booting and systemd Posted Sep 16, 2011 17:10 UTC (Fri) by mezcalero (subscriber, #45103) [Link]
systemd is not all PID 1. In fact we are very modular and ship 40 separate binaries or so.
LPC: Booting and systemd Posted Sep 16, 2011 3:39 UTC (Fri) by AndreE (subscriber, #60148) [Link]
I like this approach.
Documentation comprehensiveness being directly related to software bloat would give me a compelling argument to give to my boss when asks me to provide thorough documentation for my code
LPC: Booting and systemd Posted Sep 18, 2011 13:27 UTC (Sun) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Did I need sarcasm tags? I was trying to say 'any claims that systemd has no documentation must cater for the fact that sysvinit has dramatically less'.
|
|||||||||||||