3 ms·

Personally I do think it's fine and I don't think that a technology having warts (which is essentially a given for any reasonably complex software) indicates a

• kbenson 6y ago
  It's not that it has warts, it's that it's overly complex for what it does, and beyond the initial feature set wasn't so much planned as organically grown. I think the best and most thorough explanation of this is gotten through reading the systemd retrospective[1] that someone posted earlier this year. What becomes abundantly clear when reading it is what I think I was trying to express above, that there is so much that could be better in systemd but that it's hampered by it's own legacy baggage, which accumulated very quickly and very soon after the first implementation was released. That link is a long read, but if you have any time or effort invested into systemd and systems that use it, and find yourself having to create unit files or diagnose weirdness with services, it's very worthwhile to read if you haven't already. 1: https://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2020/05/02/0/ https://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2020/05/02/0/