Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lennart Talks Up The Power Of systemd-sysext For Testing /usr Changes

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Lennart Talks Up The Power Of systemd-sysext For Testing /usr Changes

    Phoronix: Lennart Talks Up The Power Of systemd-sysext For Testing /usr Changes

    Systemd lead developer Lennart Poettering is out with his first blog post since last September. Today he's relaying the power of the systemd-sysext component shipped as part of systemd for loading/merging "system extension" images on the system for manipulating the exposed /usr...

    https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pa...systemd-sysext

  • #2
    I hope this may be useful for accelerating boot times on HDD (e.g. by loading the OverlayFS into memory and then mounting it using sysext).

    Comment


    • #3
      Hopefully systemd will manage each executable in /usr/bin/ with multiple extensions. I say one extension for each file also in /etc/, there should be no limit to what systemd does. /sarcasm

      What's wrong with including binaries in your $PATH or copy stuff to /usr/local/ or use overlayfs and others without systemd? Or just Snap / AppImage / Flatpak?

      I somewhat like systemd but it's becoming a bit much.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by evert_mouw View Post
        What's wrong with including binaries in your $PATH or copy stuff to /usr/local/ or use overlayfs and others without systemd? Or just Snap / AppImage / Flatpak?
        Why not just read the blog post?

        Nobody is stopping you from doing it in another way.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by tildearrow View Post
          I hope this may be useful for accelerating boot times on HDD (e.g. by loading the OverlayFS into memory and then mounting it using sysext).
          I didn't get it, how do you mean?

          Comment


          • #6
            Frankly, the time of systemd is up.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by evert_mouw View Post

              What's wrong with including binaries in your $PATH or copy stuff to /usr/local/ or use overlayfs and others without systemd? Or just Snap / AppImage / Flatpak?
              Snap, Appimage and Flatpak solve a different problem. Overlayfs without systems is certainly possible, but what benefit would that bring, exactly?

              Comment


              • #8
                I already like it. PATH indeed works but sometimes it simply doesn't. And those sometimes are really annoying if systemd makes it easy reliable and quite secure - why not?
                Don't get the systemd hatred anyway.

                There are enough distros without systemd and without Wayland....whatsoever
                Last edited by CochainComplex; 27 April 2022, 07:59 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Heh. I found a typo that tildearrow missed in the third paragraph.

                  Among hte many possible use-cases for systemd-sysext
                  I feel like I'm 3 out of 100 that thinks this is a good idea.

                  tildearrow I think it'll be negligible for HDD boot speeds since reading from a HDD will still the bottleneck. Tossing a bunch of sysext stuff into ram post-boot for regular application speed increases, sure.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by jacob View Post

                    Snap, Appimage and Flatpak solve a different problem. Overlayfs without systems is certainly possible, but what benefit would that bring, exactly?
                    Standardization.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X