On Thursday 26 Jul 2012 16:48:30 Oon-Ee Ng wrote: > I read it, and all I have to say is that you obviously haven't done > much (or any?) reading on systemd. That should be a pre-requisite to > posting a request for information, and it IS if you're an Arch (DIY) > user. > At one point, I had read that initscripts is slow compared to systemd because it reads all the damn text files and has to parse it first, while with systemd, it is all binary. Now that I look back, I realize, the author must have been talking about initscripts and not the configuration files. My bad there, I agree. I was talking about text configuration file. I had this mistaken idea all the time that since now, we have systemd which is binary implementation, the text files are also converted to binary to reduce the time in fetching and parsing them and hence, reduce the boot times even more. I guess, the readahead implementation was what I was confused with, which is just prefetching, not binary. > Just a short summary of the misconceptions there, systemd does not > 'replace text files with binary equivalents', it is not a > piece-by-piece replacement (which invalidates quite a few of the > hopeful suggestions you have there). > > Actually, re-reading that, I'm not sure you understand too much about > how initscripts work (and what they do) either. Not that I'm an expert > myself, but when you say 'booting from text files' that does give a > bad impression.... those are bash scripts, to start with. I know those are bash scripts, but my above point explains it I guess. I was talkign about reading configuration "text files" vs binary files. I still believe that there should be a script/program which can output all the configurations from different file onto the terminal describing the currently configured boot process. -- Jayesh Badwaik stop html mail | always bottom-post www.asciiribbon.org | www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
