[lfs-dev] LFS 7.6: sysvinit vs systemd - Re: BLFS vs BLFS systemd?
bruce.dubbs at gmail.com
Mon Sep 8 21:31:08 PDT 2014
Dylan Cali wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:33 PM, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.dubbs at gmail.com> wrote:
>> We tried that about 6 months ago and gave up. systemd is a cancer that
>> infiltrates everything.
>> Systemd is not a part of the Linux Standards Base. System V is.
>> Note that systemd is much more complex than System V. sysvinit is about 10K
>> lines of code. The user has complete control. The LFS instantiation has
>> about 2K lines of bash scripts to support it.
>> systemd is, the last time I looked, about 150K lines of code, requires
>> packages like dbus that are not needed on most servers, and does not allow
>> the user to remove unneeded facilities. Many people call that bloat.
> I have to say, it is so refreshing to hear this from a distro
> maintainer (even if LFS is only "kind of" a distro). For the life of
> me, I cannot understand why all the major distros have jumped on the
> systemd band wagon.
> The other day I was trying to understand how updatedb was scheduled to
> run on my Arch install, as there was no entry in cron. It turns out
> it's "scheduled" via systemd: "When mlocate is installed, a script is
> automatically scheduled to run daily via systemd" . Really?
> Systemd is also a cron replacement too now?
>  https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/locate
and a dhcp client and a login client and a syslog client ...
You can disable them or ignore them, but you can't remove them if you
are using systemd for other things.
More information about the lfs-dev