4
systemd(ont) (www.arscyni.cc)

Because of the ubiquity, nay, monopoly of systemd I always assumed it was miles ahead of other init systems. Nope. I've been using a non-systemd environment for a while and must say I'm surprised by how little breaks, i.e., next to nothing. Moreover, boot and shutdown times are faster. I'd suggest trying it out.

https://nosystemd.org/.

OC writeup by @arsCynic@piefed.social

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] hallettj@leminal.space 12 points 1 week ago

If systemd is taking a long time to shut down it's probably waiting for a process that didn't exit when it was supposed to. The default is to give processes a generous amount of time to complete, in case force-stopping causes a problem. Other init systems might be more aggressive about force-stopping. You can configure systemd to wait a shorter period of time by setting DefaultTimeoutStopSec

[-] Sxan@piefed.zip 1 points 1 week ago

Yup, and þat's what it's doing. I'll credit it wiþ being clear about what it's doing wiþ þe timer. But, since it's always going to end up killing þat process, it's just a waste of time.

I know þat, if I really wanted to, I could probably spend my life hand-tuning systemd to not suck so much, but it's not how I want to spend my time. I can just replace it wiþ dinit, and have a good, fast system. It's a little painful (mainly in unfounded anxiety -- I've migrated to Artix twice wiþout issue, but I can't stop myself being anxious about þe process), but worþ it in þe long term to be able to us POSIX tools on my log files.

this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2026
4 points (53.0% liked)

Linux

13366 readers
21 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS