TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

About the Systemd Controversy

5 pointsby embiggenover 9 years ago

2 comments

vezzy-fnordover 9 years ago
I suppose I&#x27;ll repost my comment from the previous thread...<p>------<p>Firstly, the age-old canard of microkernels being &quot;too slow for the real world&quot; is decades out of date, and L4 and QNX today are ubiquitous.<p>One should not make the mistake of using the term &quot;init&quot; to refer to a particular implementation. init(8) is simply the first process. There never was a single &quot;Unix init system&quot;, though the BSD rc was always the superior one out of the originals. This is reflected to this day by its ridiculously short init scripts and the fact that a dependency system (rcorder(8)) was easily retrofitted.<p>The issue of boot speed is a misunderstood one. Properly benchmarking and having a deterministic boot process has always been difficult. Linux distros were by and large using the same tricks with sysvinit (startpar, insserv, Makefile-style concurrency, etc.) that systemd centralizes to get the same speed benefits for a while. Further, systemd introduces failure points in the boot process of its own, particularly with how it handles job scheduling and states, the occurrence of dependency loops and so forth. A lack of proper integration (which is still common, it turns out having a full proper systemd-based init configuration is hard [1]) can exacerbate this, and I&#x27;ve had experiences of &gt;2 minute-long booting on Fedora 20.<p>It must be stated that the problem with systemd isn&#x27;t its violating the &quot;Unix way&quot;. The problem is with systemd itself, <i>a priori</i>. It&#x27;s a landmine of an architecture with chronic mission scope issues and lack of proper creative direction.<p>I can also understand why a security researcher like Rob would be wary of systemd. The risks of systemd are indeed exceptionally great compared to previous systems. systemd&#x27;s PID1 handles things like configuration parsing, cgroupfs writing, supervision, system state management, mount&#x2F;automount points and its coverage is much higher than even something like launchd or Solaris SMF. The central I&#x2F;O bottleneck of something like the journal (which by far has been the buggiest systemd component) is also noteworthy.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wiki.freedesktop.org&#x2F;www&#x2F;Software&#x2F;systemd&#x2F;Optimizations&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;wiki.freedesktop.org&#x2F;www&#x2F;Software&#x2F;systemd&#x2F;Optimizati...</a>
embiggenover 9 years ago
Note: I removed the weird part of the link from this submission [0].<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10144891" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=10144891</a>
评论 #10148260 未加载
评论 #10144943 未加载