3 ms·
The issue is that it's not just ideological. "Do one thing and do it well" is important because if you want to port software to another platform, it's a lot eas
by CuriousCosmic 2y ago
The issue is that it's not just ideological. "Do one thing and do it well" is important because if you want to port software to another platform, it's a lot easier to port a single dependency component over to make it work than it is to port over the entire framework.
This is a serious problem and it makes it way harder to make things cross platform.
- Xylakant 2y agoSystemd was written specifically for Linux, hard depends on a list of features provided by the Linux kernel and leverages them to do its work. Porting it to another kernel is a rewrite. Lack of portability is in this case a design tradeoff.
- CuriousCosmic 2y agoSure that is the case for systemd itself but it's not the case for most projects that happen to use things systemd provides. There is very little benefit for most userspace software to tie itself to systemd and by extension linux when otherwise it could be portable to any unix or unix like platform. Especially when an alternative, portable solution already exists and is well established.
- fhars 2y agoThe argument was that this design of systemd makes it hard to write applications that are portable, so that systemd is effectively a very big net negative to the open source ecosystem, because it causes massive fragmentation.