The Story Behind ‘init’ and ‘systemd’: Why ‘init’ Needed to be Replaced with ‘systemd’ in Linux

If You Appreciate What We Do Here On TecMint, You Should Consider:

  1. Stay Connected to: Twitter | Facebook | Google Plus
  2. Subscribe to our email updates: Sign Up Now
  3. Get your own self-hosted blog with a Free Domain at ($3.95/month).
  4. Become a Supporter - Make a contribution via PayPal
  5. Support us by purchasing our premium books in PDF format.
  6. Support us by taking our online Linux courses

We are thankful for your never ending support.

RedHat RHCE and RHCSA Certification Book
Linux Foundation LFCS and LFCE Certification Preparation Guide

You may also like...

55 Responses

  1. Geoff Harrison says:

    sorry, but systemd is an abomination, and so is upstart, frankly. I don’t see why we replace the one thing that SysV got right.

    -mandrake (if you’ve been in the Linux world that long, yes, that one)

  2. Samuel says:

    Systemd was a mistake to begin with. Change is coming (sinit, s6, openrc, shepherd, runit).

    You can add to systemd bottlenecks:
    bugs uncovered day in, day out (you remember about the “tweeter” thing? is that the kind of thing you would expect from /sbin/init?)

    when your root device fails, any already-opened session is rendered useless (can’t access systemd logs, can’t debug, can’t reboot, that’s something you used being able to do, when these used to be separate components, one might have broken without bringing down everything)

    AFAIU: there isn’t a single developer with a full visual on the whole project ramifications/understanding of what’s going on, what could go wrong.
    binary logs => logs corruption.

    Listing “low memory footprint” as a feature doesn’t make any sense: what are we comparing? have you looked at init?

    Saying systemd isn’t POSIX compliant is a cute euphemism. From day one: systemd didn’t comply with Unix philosophy. That should have been a red light, and I blame Red Hat here.

  3. WhatConnor says:

    easy extensible startup script row? what drugs are you on?
    have you ever written a service script for either daemons?

  4. Aman Raj says:

    Nice article brief and informative .
    Thanks , keep posting the similar things

  5. Reddy says:

    Excellent Article

  6. Lawrence says:

    Why no one start something to opposite it and use init instead. I’m new to Linux but I agree with the term no broken don’t fix it. In fact a lot of people will be able to have a stable and effective system if the system stop changing dramatically.

    More contributors and newcomer like myself would enjoy Linux centos more. Please don’t end up like ms window os.

Got something to say? Join the discussion.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *