zlacker

>>cf100c+(OP)
This is a mindblower. To quote Bruce Dubbs:

''As a personal note, I do not like this decision. To me LFS is about learning how a system works. Understanding the boot process is a big part of that. systemd is about 1678 "C" files plus many data files. System V is "22" C files plus about 50 short bash scripts and data files. Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider important.

However, the decision needs to be made.''

>>cf100c+n
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/main/src/core doesn't look like 1678 C files to me.

>>raggi+jf
In what way was Bruce incorrect, your one link excepted?

>>cf100c+8g
he is counting every c file in the systemd _repository_ which houses multiple projects, libraries and daemons. he equates that to the c file count for a single init. it's a disingenuous comparison. systemd-init is a small slice of the code in the systemd repository.

>>raggi+nh
> he is counting every c file in the systemd _repository_ which houses multiple projects, libraries and daemons. he equates that to the c file count for a single init. it's a disingenuous comparison.

See, this is why when I refer to the Systemd Project, I spell it as "SystemD", and when I'm referring to systemd(1), I spell it "systemd". I understand that some folks who only wish to shit on the Systemd Project also spell it that way, but I ain't one of them.

> systemd-init is a small slice of the code in the systemd repository.

Given the context:

   Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider important.

I'd say that the topic of discussion was SystemD, rather than systemd. systemd doesn't provide you with all that many capabilities; it's really not much more than what you get with OpenRC + a supervisor (either supervise-daemon or s6).