In case you didn’t know, boot time also highly depends on the hardware. The worse the hardware is, the longer are boot times and the bigger is the difference between init systems.
Well tbf I’m using a framework now, but on my last laptop, a 2014 toshiba satellite with an i5 and 4gb of ram, it still started up in less than 30sec. Last time I booted it was when the framework 16s shipped, so not that long ago. What, you running a pentium II with 8 megs of RAM or something?
I had 2 testing devices: one with 4 gb of RAM and one with 8 gb. None of them are as powerful as anything with an i5 but I think they’re decent enough.
Well alright, but that’s a case of decade+ old hardware that may need something lighter on resources depending on the processor. 4gb of ram is totally enough to boot systemd systems quickly, so the processor may be a bit of your bottleneck there. But that’s not exactly unexpected, for something like that you’d likely be looking for a lighter distro over one that is more current, like puppy, antix, slax, something meant for that application, it’s just a case of picking the correct tool for the job.
You’re totally right here but it only confirms what I said. If systemd wasn’t heavier, it wouldn’t take longer to boot on any hardware (exceptions are possible though).
Tbf, idk how long those systems would take to boot with a systemd-less OS either, but I bet it’s still longer than my systemd-having satellite or framework, because the problem here isn’t systemd, it’s the ancient hardware. It’s like claiming iOS sucks because the OG iPhone can’t run iOS 18 well. (It does suck of course due to the walled garden and many other things, but the point is trying to run newer stuff on older hardware is always going to be “slower” because “old hardware.”)
I think somewhere deep down you probably know that. Sure, systemd is heavier than no systemd, but also hardware that isn’t over 10yr+ old can run it fine and nitpicking about its boot time is ridiculous unless you have that specific need, in which case your need becomes pertinent information to your nitpick.
Btw, I’d be interested in knowing just how long “long time to boot” is, is it even longer than a minute or two, which would be serviceable on hardware that ancient imo?
Which part of systemd is slow?
Mostly boot time.
https://systemd.io/OPTIMIZATIONS/
"System can offer boot times of less than 3s
That’s the same as if I said “Cyberpunk 2077 can offer 240 FPS in native 4K”. Sure, but only on a professional PC with many GPUs.
Meanwhile my system (with the d) boots in less than 30sec. How fucking fast do you need it to be? Boot before you turn it on or something?
In case you didn’t know, boot time also highly depends on the hardware. The worse the hardware is, the longer are boot times and the bigger is the difference between init systems.
Well tbf I’m using a framework now, but on my last laptop, a 2014 toshiba satellite with an i5 and 4gb of ram, it still started up in less than 30sec. Last time I booted it was when the framework 16s shipped, so not that long ago. What, you running a pentium II with 8 megs of RAM or something?
I had 2 testing devices: one with 4 gb of RAM and one with 8 gb. None of them are as powerful as anything with an i5 but I think they’re decent enough.
Well alright, but that’s a case of decade+ old hardware that may need something lighter on resources depending on the processor. 4gb of ram is totally enough to boot systemd systems quickly, so the processor may be a bit of your bottleneck there. But that’s not exactly unexpected, for something like that you’d likely be looking for a lighter distro over one that is more current, like puppy, antix, slax, something meant for that application, it’s just a case of picking the correct tool for the job.
You’re totally right here but it only confirms what I said. If systemd wasn’t heavier, it wouldn’t take longer to boot on any hardware (exceptions are possible though).
Tbf, idk how long those systems would take to boot with a systemd-less OS either, but I bet it’s still longer than my systemd-having satellite or framework, because the problem here isn’t systemd, it’s the ancient hardware. It’s like claiming iOS sucks because the OG iPhone can’t run iOS 18 well. (It does suck of course due to the walled garden and many other things, but the point is trying to run newer stuff on older hardware is always going to be “slower” because “old hardware.”)
I think somewhere deep down you probably know that. Sure, systemd is heavier than no systemd, but also hardware that isn’t over 10yr+ old can run it fine and nitpicking about its boot time is ridiculous unless you have that specific need, in which case your need becomes pertinent information to your nitpick.
Btw, I’d be interested in knowing just how long “long time to boot” is, is it even longer than a minute or two, which would be serviceable on hardware that ancient imo?