Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> [libc and the kernel] currently have a much better guaranteed quality than systemd,

What are you basing that on?



Historical behavior.

There doesn't exist anything else this could be based on.


Does systemd have a historical record of its defect rate being significantly greater than that of the kernel/glibc?

I just checked Coverity scans, and the most recent defect densities appear to be:

    kernel : 0.59
    glibc  : 0.54
    systemd: 0.04
which actually looks pretty good for systemd. Is there some other analysis you're basing this off? Or are the current rates atypical, and systemd used to be a lot worse?

https://scan.coverity.com/projects/linux

https://scan.coverity.com/projects/gnu-c-library-glibc

https://scan.coverity.com/projects/systemd




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: