Systemd vs SystemV-init

what do you think? Is there any chance of future implementation in EOs ??? I read that it is much more stable than systemd, and I think much faster. I had the opportunity on MX-Linux to try it, and on top it consumes even less resources. is there any way to install in EOs like in MX-Linux ??? :thinking:

We will follow the path of Arch in this matter for now.

But if we get more people to do that kind of development work, things might change, but of course can’t promise anything. :slight_smile:


The Archwiki article on SysVinit is out of date, but worth a read if you are interested. SysVinit has been relegated to AUR, a sure sign that it’s not mainstream material. My guess is there are bigger fish to fry in linuxland than a return to SysVinit even if some people might like to see it happen.

What stability and resource issues are you having that makes you think SysV might solve?

no problems, just tried mx linux, where I had the chance to choose sysvinit, before booting, and according to htop and neofetch, consume less resources, with the same DE, than systemd … but mxlinux is not arch based, and I gave up on it … I am looking for a distribution, which will consume when it is in use and which will consume only what is necessary to run the system when it is not in use (idle) … that is why I stopped at Eos … .systemctl list-unit-files --state = enabled, can say a lot in comparison ubuntu-manjaro or ubuntu-Eos … so I remain EOs … :v: :v: :wink:

:joy: :joy: :joy: let me to write eos to usb first, …if i dont reply this night, so break it up :joy:

Availebility and the ask of some technology is versus now and the past way different. System does use more memory a bit but its also adapted in the spirit of time, tech’ologys of 15 year back is way different then the tech current. Also 16gb is the new standard also, as on memory saving you can alway set a question mark… personal opinionnis just that tech landscape is changed so init should to :+1: