4 ms·
My grumpy preferred alternative would be "you're supposed to be an init service. That's not your job".
by probably_wrong 1y ago
My grumpy preferred alternative would be "you're supposed to be an init service. That's not your job".
- Un1corn 1y ago> systemd is a suite of basic building blocks for a Linux system. You can always use a simpler init system if you want
- nickysielicki 1y agoI linked it elsewhere in this thread, but you should really watch this talk, particularly 12:45 through 16:20: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo tl;dr: systemd isn't meant to be an init system, it's meant to manage services, and the alternative world where you don't have a unified system for managing services and events actually sucks.
- egorfine 1y ago> systemd isn't meant to be an init system, it's meant to embrace and extinguish unix philosophy. > the alternative world where [] actually sucks. You should bear in mind that there are plenty of people here on HN who have had the experience of running pre-systemd unixes and they know exactly how much "the alternative world" sucked. Spoiler: not much.
- nickysielicki 1y agoI was in college before Debian adopted systemd, and worked part time as a sysadmin managing hundreds of pre-systemd Debian systems. You’re wrong.
- egorfine 1y agoI was in college when you were born. And managed thousands of pre-systemd instances including a vast zoo of unixes which were long gone by the time systemd ate the world. You're wrong.
- nickysielicki 1y agoGood for you, I'm simply saying that my feelings on the superiority of systemd are informed by having used linux before systemd was around, whereas you insinuated that I had not. I don't really care to argue about it.