3 ms·
But that's systemd the project, not systemd the init system. You don't need to use any of those components to use systemd, which has no dependencies on them. Th
by tapoxi 2y ago
But that's systemd the project, not systemd the init system. You don't need to use any of those components to use systemd, which has no dependencies on them. Those services can live and die on their own merits.
- bigfatkitten 2y agoThey can ship as much trash as they like, so long as it doesn't become my problem. Those components become my problem when the distributions I choose to use choose to adopt them, and then I have to work around them.
- tuna74 2y agoChoose something else then. If there is one thing the world is not lacking it is Linux distros.
- bigfatkitten 2y agoAs a hobbyist, sure. It's not quite that simple when I have commercial apps I need to run in a regulated environment.
- growse 2y agoThere's nothing about regulated environments or commercial apps that limit your choice to "systemd on Linux". Everything is a tradeoff.
- bigfatkitten 2y agoThose apps and the system's accreditation requirements limit my choice to a particular vendor's ecosystem so yes, they do. Otherwise I could avoid Linux entirely if I so chose, and make the systemd consideration irrelevant.
- the_real_cher 2y agoIt becomes default on all the main stream distros though.
- consteval 2y agoWhich should make you consider its validity. If all these distros chose it, independent of one another, there's gotta be a reason. The reason is that it's much, much simpler and more maintainable from a distro perspective and a sysadmin perspective. Ultimately distros decide what software is on their distro and users decide what distros to use. So the solution here is to find a distro that meets your needs.
- the_real_cher 2y ago[dead]