Okay, I like to think as myself as an open minded individual. I'm not a systemd fanboy either, I just research and use what I believe it's better for myself. Th

Okay, I like to think as myself as an open minded individual. I'm not a systemd fanboy either, I just research and use what I believe it's better for myself. There is a reason why I can't consider the anti-systemd guys seriously: It all seems FUD to me. Take for example point 8, "you have to reboot to update systemd. Okay, not really, but the update might go wrong!". Really? Going point by point: 1. As the site says, systemd is both an init system and a collection of programs that make sense to have in a system. One can already strip most of everything from it (I think only journald is mandatory), and there is usually a stable api between every component, so one can simply replace them. In fact, I believe that half of the complains about systemd would disappear if it all the tools were developed in a different repository and not under a "systemd umbrella" (Isn't one of the major point pro-BSD the fact that the base system is all developed together?) 2. If you want to use systemd but have plain-text logs, journald can pass everything to syslog and similar daemons. What everyone forget is the bonus that journald provides: no more "cat /var/log/*.log | grep <program> | sort -u" and hope that applications log in the same format, I have everything in a single place and can browse them by unit, by user, by time, by urgency... 3. I can agree with that. But it's not that sysinitv or upstart worked on non-linux systems (without ugly hacks) 4. And? I'm not sure what's the problem here. udev and dbus are mandatory by pretty much anything that's not a .sh script nowadays. 5. Okay, fair point. "It assumes that users and admins are dumb" can you really blame them? 6. Fair point again, systemd is bigger than sysinitv. But that's almost saying that we should all use microhttpd instead of nginx/apache because it's smaller. Also the simple fact that it's included in RHEL 7 mean that it got audicted by RH, which make me feel safe. 7. That's just FUD. Here's Gnome 3.10 running on OpenBSD: http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20140219085851 http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20140219085851 Gnome will depend on systemd when under wayland, that's instead a fact. Actually, on logind, which has an api that anyone can reimplemnt (https://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/09/25/gnome-and-logindsystemd-thoughts/ https://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/09/25/gnome-and-logind...) 8. Not true, again. Right now, on my system: pgrep -l systemd 1 systemd 354 systemd-journal 386 systemd-udevd 766 systemd-logind 1190 systemd 1754 systemd Also, I still fail to see why "it's big, it will fail" is a thing. What matters is code quality, not size. 9. Fair point. 10. This might or not be possible, I don't have much experience in writing unit files so I don't really know the limits. 11. Nobody is forcing anyone to adopt systemd. It's getting adopted because distributions and developers think it's better. And after months/years of complains about systemd, I still haven't seen anyone trying to produce anything that has the same advantages for sysadmins and programmers. Really, that's how it feels: "I'm going to complain and complain and complain, but I won't lift a finger to change the course of events". Can anyone make a point in favor of sysinitv (or against systemd) without bringing in abstract concept as "Unix philosophy" and plain wrong facts?