2026-02-20 18:03 UTC
Technically, sysv everything was just a file full of instructions for the shell to parse and initialize. Human readable "technically". It was simple and light weight. SystemD is a bit heavier and more complex as a system service binary. But that load and complexity is generally offset by added features that are extremely nice to have. Providing much more standardized targets and configuration iirc.
I had to search and dig trying to figure out how to set up services properly for my distro, back in the 90s. And when/how to start/restart them. There wasn't one way to do it all. SysD made it all much more standard, simple, and clear. It's biggest sin, is that it's one more binary attack surface that might be exploited.
Replies (3)
-
@MajinBlayze@lemmy.world 2026-02-20 20:00
Why are binaries uniquely attackable in a way that init scripts aren't?
-
@frongt@lemmy.zip 2026-02-20 23:13
Yeah, sysv init is all just scripts under the hood, and it's a bit fragile/arcane. You have to write a bunch of files by hand, reference them correctly, and place and link them in the right directories. Systemd is a bit better, I have to admit that.
-
@MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 2026-02-21 11:54
Openrc, Runit, s6, dinit...