3 ms·
A systemd conceptually is quite a good idea. However systemd is not that systemd. Much rather go with rc.conf + script approach, disable all systemd services, l
by redsavagefiero 8y ago
A systemd conceptually is quite a good idea. However systemd is not that systemd. Much rather go with rc.conf + script approach, disable all systemd services, lock selinux against systemd socket activations and run a purpose controlled environment. Avoiding systemd does force one to not use Linux as a desktop..oh well.
- enriquto 8y ago> Avoiding systemd does force one to not use Linux as a desktop Why do you say that? You can even use gnome without systemd, but there are still other desktops.
- redsavagefiero 8y agoI have't looked at it rcently but the last time I checked systemd was the 'nice to have' that was mandatory for some of the software I associate with a fully fuctional desktop which is not just a WM, DE (or not) and basic applications like xterm , vim, etc...But you are right. You can run the linux desktop like its 2007 without systemd on select distributions without screwing around too much...of course don't add new software without researching dependencies and default build options or you may end up with the worst of systemd dependencies anyway. At that point I just run KDE on FreeBSD.