> In terms of OOM, there is little point of discussion here, you're too far out in left field, too far from the admin world, to even hear me. I'm not sure why

> In terms of OOM, there is little point of discussion here, you're too far out in left field, too far from the admin world, to even hear me. I'm not sure why you feel the need to attack my experience, but I maintained an internal Linux distribution for a Fortune 500 through the transition to systemd, managed fleets of 10-100k concurrent hosts, written hundreds of systemd units... You're simply fighting against the grain. As a systems administrator, systemd helps you get stuff done. It's very powerful, and almost every feature can be simply ignored if it's not for you, which is great. The problem is that so much is intrinsically coupled to init. Want to start per-user daemons at user log in? Manage logging uniformly without the pitfalls of traditional syslog? Define reliable service state targets across network state changes? Isolate subsystems? Zero-downtime deploys without writing complex application daemonization logic? Portable services? Snapshots? Peripherals? Not to mention all the incredible work to make multistage bootloaders (and single stage!) completely integrated. Straightforward to debug, patch, build yourself. It's definitely the worst, except for every alternative. I'm sorry that you find it so miserable. You linked to Ubuntu, so if that's the bulk of your experience, I encourage you to try a better managed distro. Debian, Arch, NixOS, or roll your own.