SystemD is blamed for long boot times and being heavy and bloated on resources. I tried OpenRC and Runit on real hardware (Ryzen 5000-series laptop) for week each and saw only 1 second faster boot time.

I’m old enough to remember plymouth.service (graphical image) being the most slowest service on boot in Ubuntu 16.04 and 18.04. But I don’t see that as an issue anymore. I don’t have a graphical systemD boot on my Arch but I installed Fedora Sericea and it actually boots faster than my Arch despite the plymouth (or whatever they call it nowadays).

My 2 questions:

  1. Is the current SystemD rant derived from years ago (while they’ve improved a lot)?
  2. Should Linux community rant about bigger problems such as Wayland related things not ready for current needs of normies?
  • NuuskisOP
    31·
    2 years ago

    Lot’s of things in computing should be simplified. Especially bios firmware / boot process. It has become overly complicated mess offering zero value for anybody. In 10 years the bios chip size has increased from 8 mbit to 256 mbit and no features added. Only TPM 2.0 has been added, but it is another chip than bios.

    • jarfil@lemmy.ml
      4·
      2 years ago

      Haven’t you heard? The UEFI bios can have binaries included by the board manufacturer that Windows will ask for and automatically run on startup… for example to download a GigaByte control center installer to fill your recent install with crapware… that would then proceed to download a self-update from a http (no-s) URL. And the binaries will work even if they’re signed with revoked certificates and have been injected by any device with DMA access!

      That’s… like… super cool, isn’t it? If only we could have that on Linux… /s

      Also, the modern bioses have pretty graphics and mouse support… /s/s

      • NuuskisOP
        1·
        2 years ago

        I noticed this driver crapware by updating the mobo bios I bought used. Luckily MSI has a rollback tool lol.

        My i5-2500K had a nice GUI bios with 16 mbit bios chip. Including UEFI and Secureboot and other modern features.

    • Sparking@lemm.ee
      1·
      2 years ago

      I think that the task of managing packages essential to the OS is a truly complex task. Especially if you want to have a desktop like environment that is standard for all users. It makes sense that a popular solution has emerged. If you don’t like it, you can use something else, but I still feel it is really rude to whine about other devs that use it.