7 ms·

Systemd hater here. My stance is and always was: if you love systemd, go nuts with it. I'm not looking to reach into your bathroom to set your shower temperatur

Systemd hater here. My stance is and always was: if you love systemd, go nuts with it. I'm not looking to reach into your bathroom to set your shower temperature. But I don't want to have to run it or even think about it. Lennart has other plans, hence his campaign to get distros to require it and software up the stack to hard-depend on it. I don't like its design, I want to opt out of it in favor of something better, but one of the development effort's goals is making that extremely difficult for modern Linux systems. That's my issue with it. But really it macht nichs for me right now because I run Void, btw.

eth0up 2y ago
I was feeling a bit Kafka-ish with all the gushing systemd support until I saw this comment. And same here; I don't care what other folks are enamored with, but them "other plans" you mention, they concern me and I wish it concerned others too.
Vilian 2y ago
>I don't like its design, I want to opt out of it in favor of something better Others design were already tested extensively, and the one that stuck was systemd, don't you already stopped to think that the "better design" is the one that systemd are currently using?
- bitwize 2y ago
  Why are you even using Linux to begin with? Other OS designs have already been tested extensively, and the one that stuck was Windows. Didn't you consider that Windows is the better OS for your needs? My criteria for a good init system design do not align with Lennart's, or with Red Hat's. It's not winner-take-all in principle, even if it approaches being so in practice.
paulddraper 2y ago
> distros to require it Distros requires a lot of stuff, e.g. libc. This does not seem inappropriate given what a distro is. > software up the stack to hard-depend on it What does this refer to? I can see this for session/user/service management programs. But not normal single-user programs.

eth0up 2y ago

I was feeling a bit Kafka-ish with all the gushing systemd support until I saw this comment. And same here; I don't care what other folks are enamored with, but them "other plans" you mention, they concern me and I wish it concerned others too.

Vilian 2y ago

>I don't like its design, I want to opt out of it in favor of something better Others design were already tested extensively, and the one that stuck was systemd, don't you already stopped to think that the "better design" is the one that systemd are currently using?

bitwize 2y ago
Why are you even using Linux to begin with? Other OS designs have already been tested extensively, and the one that stuck was Windows. Didn't you consider that Windows is the better OS for your needs? My criteria for a good init system design do not align with Lennart's, or with Red Hat's. It's not winner-take-all in principle, even if it approaches being so in practice.

paulddraper 2y ago

> distros to require it Distros requires a lot of stuff, e.g. libc. This does not seem inappropriate given what a distro is. > software up the stack to hard-depend on it What does this refer to? I can see this for session/user/service management programs. But not normal single-user programs.