Before anything else, I would like to say that I admit systemd has brought great change to GNU/Linux. sysvinit wasn’t the best, and custom scripts for every distro is a pain I’d rather not have.

With that said, Poettering now works for Microsoft, systemd has basically taken over all of the common/popular distributions (if this is about the argument of “systemd making it easier for developers”, disclaimer: I don’t know. I’m not a developer), and this has led to a rampant monopolisation of the init system.

Memes aside, this has very real consequences. If you don’t want another CentOS-style “oof, sorry, off to testing” debacle happening with your init system, might want to look at the more “advanced” distributions that let you choose the init system.

I am well aware that systemd works well for the most part, and that gamers and most other people likely don’t care - which is fine, at least for now. I do expect to see a massive turnover in sentiment if something ever happens to systemd (not that I’d like for that to happen, but no trusting RedHat anymore), but I suppose we’ll get to it when we do.

My sentiments are well enunciated in this recent post on the Devuan forum: https://dev1galaxy.org/viewtopic.php?id=5826

Cheers!

  • MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    A different kernel would lead to a completely different OS. I do think the BSDs should be used more, but that is not the point of the post.

    • Tobias Hunger@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why? Slab sysv-init (or openrc or s6) and the gnu tools the onto it and you will hardly be able to tell the difference :-)

      That is actually the thing I like about systemd: They expose a lot of linux-only features to admins and users, making the kernel shine.