Regarding that, although I can see how Enterprise might find some aspects of systemd useful for more than locking things up so we have to buy them or into them, still all this time later the single most mentioned advantage to SOHO Desktop sdystems remains boot times. Who cares about a few seconds in boot times that can cost hours in maintenance let alone recovery? Makes zero sense to me.

enorbet --

Yes, and when one factors in the Hardware POST times, the OS boot time may be completely insignificant, depending on the particular Hardware.

For example, the HP ProLiant ML10 v2 box I use for BackUps takes over two minutes to POST but Slackware64 14.2 HUGE boots in 18 sec !

Who cares if the OS boots a couple seconds faster when it takes so long to even begin booting the OS ?

And I am not convinced that systemd systems actually DO boot faster in real-world situations.

Admittedly, I am not yet up-to-speed on CentOS 7, but Wall Clock Tests I've done with CentOS 6 Minimal vs CentOS 7 Minimal on the same Intel NUC6CAYB shows that CentOS 6 boots as fast as CentOS 7 !

IMO, you nailed the real reason for systemd with this:
is the REAL reason for systemd :(

That, and I don't believe that Lennart will be done with our Linux Servers until they all run like his Windows Laptop :)

-- kjh

Some people seem to have completely forgotten the topic of this thread.

How many times should we ask you not to pollute all threads with your opinions about systemd, folks?

With all due respect, the subject was brought up within this thread and all these years later remains a very valid advantage of Slackware over 90% of other distros.