• Queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    It’s not inherently bad, it “fails” the Unix Philosophy of “Do one thing and do it well” but since Linux’s kernel is:

    • Unix-like, not Unix
    • Fails this philosophy, as it does more than one thing but does all of it pretty well
    • systemd is just a bundle of tools that do one thing and do it well under one package, like Linux’s kernel

    It used to be a mess, but that’s solved. The biggest reason to avoid systemd is mainly user preference, not anything malicious. 90% of current distros use systemd as its easier for the maintainers and package programmers to build for the general than each package and each distro having their own methods of how to do an init system and other tasks.

    How Debian and Arch and Gentoo and Slackware and other big distros worked was different, and the maintainers of those packages had to know “Debian’s way” and not a general way that most places accept. Systemd actually solved the Too Many Standards! issue.

    I’ve never really seen a big argument against systemd, but maybe I’ve just not heard it.

    • thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      back when you had an init system and you got it just the way you wanted it, you would be pissed that you had to move to systemd

      now its there when you install and it is stable so it isn’t a big deal. But old beards hate change.