4 ms·
Some parts are extremely Linux-centric. I'd argue the better parts of systemd (it's not all bad but there's a lot of low-hanging fruit for all of us to gripe a
by ThatGeoGuy 4y ago
Some parts are extremely Linux-centric.
I'd argue the better parts of systemd (it's not all bad but there's a lot of low-hanging fruit for all of us to gripe and bicker about) are the imaginings that came from launchd. That for sure was more UNIX centric than "linux" in particular.
You're right that the criticism "just become windows" seems weird - if anything else one should just say "get a mac" since that's where a lot of the launchd ideas originated.
- dale_glass 4y agoI mean, systemd makes heavy use of Linux-only APIs. For instance it's very reliant on cgroups, a Linux-only feature. The main project rejects even trying to be portable. This ensures there's no such thing as accounting for that some feature might not work on FreeBSD, because the project just clearly states that it won't be a thing on *BSD.