On 11 August 2012 19:14, Baho Utot <baho-utot@columbus.rr.com> wrote:
On 08/11/2012 12:22 PM, Tom Gundersen wrote:
I would be surprised if a systemd-based system requires more resources than a sysvinit-based one, but that is of course something one would have to measure for each particular use-case.
There are lots of systemd-based embedded systems cropping up (the embedded world seems more excited about sysntemd than the desktop world). The aim of systemd is to work on anything from embedded, via desktop to servers.
-t
I am not looking at this from an systemd point of view. My point is the constant bloat with software today. Theses bloated packages will not fit/function on hand held devices. Is it not more sensible to build small apps that do one or two things well then bloated apps that try to do 25 things unwell?
Systemd is broken into multiple small utilities (see eg. systemd-tools that are used by initscripts already) that does one thing, so it's not one big scary binary that does everything. In fact I believe* systemd is more suited for embedded devices than the current initscripts. Systemd is a bunch of small binaries that should be fast to execute in contrary to interpreting piles of bash scripts. Lukas * note that I'm saying this even though I don't like systemd very much (it's just my personal opinion, so don't try to argue with that) and I don't use it on any of my systems (nor I'm planning to in the near future).