zlacker

>>cf100c+(OP)
> 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.

Systemd is basically the Windowsfication of Linux. I'm always surprised by the people that champion it who also used to shit on Windows with the registry or whatever.

Cognitive dissonance is a hell of a thing.

>>JCatth+qb
Pedantic but systemd is inspired by MacOS launchd, not by Windows services. It has nothing akin to the registry, which even microsoft admits is a pain on windows.

Oh, and usually people shit on windows for many reasons, but some of the very core features of the OS are robust and the Linux crowd could take a hint. Like, you know, the notion of service at the OS-level and not some random bash script that nohup'd a binary. Oh wait, that's what does Windows, MacOS and Linux with systemd.

>>tuetuo+lw2
We generally aren't in the habit of using "random" scripts to do anything. They're usually carefully developed to do exactly what we need them to do, precisely, and nothing more. Not the giant pile of buggy ass code and security nightmare that is systemd.

By the way, you don't seem to be aware that you can use any language you want to create startup "scripts" including compiled binaries, if you hate shell scripting so much.

Do you even know any shell script? Serious question. Many 'bash' haters know nothing about the language--starting with calling it 'bash' instead of 'shell script.' There are several different flavors just of shell scripting languages, and bash is only one.