> Why you would want to specify which services had to come before or after > which other services is obvious when you consider that systemd boots > services in parallel. There is no way in the current system, and no way > without specifying, to boot several daemons at the same time and then > boot other daemons afterwards Maybe you could be clearer because scripting is almost boundless. Performance sensitive apps may require perl, C, assembly or hardware driven systems of course. The issue to me begins with whatever requires systemd be so large to start with and not be started by a script or init to begin with. There are plenty of languages with concurrency. personally I will obviously keep tabs on how systemd evolves but currently it's not a glove that fits for us all, thankfully that's not required to run arch easily yet. > that depend on them having completely > launched. In the interests of learning for my scripts and hopefully without leading the witnesses who may badger Tom? I'm interested to know how systemd knows universally that a service is "completely launched" ignoring that daemons themselves don't always know? I'm surprised people are still coming out with it is obviously far superior in every way. Change it to many ways atleast, please. -- ________________________________________________________ Why not do something good every day and install BOINC. ________________________________________________________
