The premise of your reply is that the choice is between systemd, SysV-init or Upstart. That premise is false. > * systemd has overall good built-in security!

The premise of your reply is that the choice is between systemd, SysV-init or Upstart. That premise is false. > * systemd has overall good built-in security! I vividly remember how Pottering closed a root exploit issue as "not a bug", so no. > You claim systemd is a "badly written multifunction blob" but that's mostly not true, > look at `/usr/lib/systemd/systemd-` and `/usr/bin/systemd-`. Systemd is split out into > multiple purpose-specific executables in almost every place where it makes sense to do > it. None of those executables can be used without installing the whole systemd, so that argument is flawed.