Ecce: http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... I'm considering OpenB

Ecce: http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... I'm considering OpenBSD for many reasons other than the init system, e.g. harmonious, lightweight, stable, understandable system, workable by default (no need for distros), very good docs, seasoned devs, etc. The only problem is that I need the ath5k driver, that FreeBSD has and OpenBSD doesn't. The problem with systemd is, from my perspective, a desktop user that uses mostly emacs and xombrero, on arch linux nowadays, that it is too complicated, to maintain and to understand. I can understand an rc script, and a crontab, but systemd comes with lots of concepts and a complex hierarchy of files and lots of conventions, commands, tools, etc., and it does nearly everything. So much so that I refrain from fixing issues on my system, rather, I work around them, because I need to learn way too much before I can do so: I copied the suspend-sedate.service thing from Arch wiki, it doesn't work, but I'm really afraid to investigate, because I'll fall into a whirlpool of tutorials and man pages which says alien things like unit files, services, this, that. So I just hibernate the computer manually. Systemd looks like a good thing for big systems, but for desktop, it is superfluous and overkill. And the anti-systemd sentiment is because if you don't want to use systemd, you either have to fork your distro (forks exist), switch to a rarely-used one, or build your custom linux installation.