Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
Visit Stack Exchange
Stack Internal
Knowledge at work
Bring the best of human thought and AI automation together at your work.
Explore Stack Internal Prior to RedHatRHEL 7, their distributions were built on SysV, a manager that looks much like the legacy SystemVSystem V (init.dinit.d, rcrc, runlevels...).
They changed it to SystemDsystemd from RedHatRHEL 7.
But what is the real difference between SysV and the unixUnix-like SystemVSystem V?
Why did they call it SysV, if it's the same?
Prior to RedHat 7, their distributions were built on SysV, a manager that looks much like the legacy SystemV (init.d, rc, runlevels...).
They changed it to SystemD from RedHat 7.
But what is the real difference between SysV and the unix-like SystemV?
Why did they call it SysV, if it's the same?
Prior to RHEL 7, their distributions were built on SysV, a manager that looks much like the legacy System V (init.d, rc, runlevels...).
They changed it to systemd from RHEL 7.
But what is the real difference between SysV and the Unix-like System V?
Why did they call it SysV, if it's the same?
Prior to RedHat 7, their distributions were built on SysV, a manager that looks much like the legacy SystemV (init.d, rc, runlevels...).
They changed it to SystemD from RedHat 7.
But what is the real difference between SysV and the unix-like SystemV?
Why did they call it SysV, if it's the same?
