3 ms·
>> Yes, it is maybe monolithic (but so is the Linux kernel). > it really isn't, it's largely a collection of relatively small binaries that do one thing well b
by fsflover 2y ago
>> Yes, it is maybe monolithic (but so is the Linux kernel).
> it really isn't, it's largely a collection of relatively small binaries that do one thing well but they are designed to work with each other.
So where are all small the projects trying to replace the small parts of systemd? AFAIK there are no stable or convenient APIs in all those parts, so even though technically systemd consists if many binaries, it is monolithic.
This is exactly what people call "forces distributions to use it", i. e., you must choose all or nothing.
- gf000 2y agoI don't believe Linux userspace maintainers are lining up en masse, plus if your alternative implementation doesn't significantly improve the status quo, why even bother?
- fsflover 2y agoHere in the comments you can find a lot of complaints about non-main parts of systemd, which could be improved easily if it was actually non-monolithic.
- znpy 2y ago> So where are all small the projects trying to replace the small parts of systemd? you should go ask that to "small projects" developers, not to systemd developers, i guess
- fsflover 2y agoThere are always people improving small things as a hobby - except for the systemd components. It tell us that it's harder than it seems.