I use plasma, BTW

  • Limitless_screaming@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    If you actually want a reason, then most people experience faster boot up times using runit instead of Systemd. I haven’t tried it yet though.

    • ares35@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      maybe if you ran systemd you wouldn’t have to boot up so often that actual boot times mattered that much.

          • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            But then it wouldn’t fit the “systemd = devil” narrative if it was actually tested and found out to be false lol

          • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think it would not actually be easy to test this. The massive combinations of hardware and software configurations in use out in the world make it nearly impossible to conclusively say one way or the other.

            For instance consider the hypothetical of a service with a bug that increases its startup in certain circumstances. If Systemd triggered this bug and OpenRC didn’t because of some default setting in each, perhaps a timeout setting, would you say OpenRC is conclusively better at start up time? Not really, they just got lucky that their default bypassed someone elses bug. Just off the top of my head other things that would probably cause hell in comparisons are disk access speeds, RAM bottlenecks, network load, CPU and GPU temp and performance etc.

            You can perhaps test for specific use cases and sets of services, but I think this is more useful for improving each init system than it is as a comparison between them.