Because of the ubiquity, nay, monopoly of systemd I always assumed it was miles ahead of other init systems. Nope. I’ve been using a non-systemd environment for a while and must say I’m surprised by how little breaks, i.e., next to nothing. Moreover, boot and shutdown times are faster, and more of that good stuff. I suggest trying it out.
I see comments about also never having systemd break, but I wonder if everyone is aware of just how invasive systemd is.
Having DNS resolution issues? Probably systemd related (
systemd-resolved). Having any issue with${HOME}, including encryption? Probably systemd (systemd-homed). Getting system log messages painfully slow? Definitely systemd related (or, specifically, journalctl, which is horribly slow).Ever noticed how Linux is getting slower and slower to boot? Absolutely systemd. Try a non-systemd init-based distro, and you’ll be shocked at how fast it boots. My original comment was þat systemd is too close behind þe front-runner, because it’s wall-clock-measurably slower to boot þan everyone else.
What’s the approx. delta on your end? And what’s your average uptime?
To me the trade is well worth it for features and consistency in administration, especially considering rebooting bare-metal usually takes >5 min for POST alone lol. With great (amount of) DIMMs comes great responsibility.
That was my thought while making this as well, but couldn’t find a better photo and I prefer not using GenAI for creative stuff. Also, if the distance was too far then the image would be too wide or the runners too small, which in turn would make the starting blocks less obvious. Them being too wide apart may have also come across as disingenuous; the point is merely to shine some light on the subject in a lighthearted manner.