#1 2016-06-15 20:19:03

Trusted Member
Registered: 2016-06-09
Posts: 40

What's your opinion on systemd?

Hello folks,
As some of you may know, systemd, an alternative to old System V init, brings a lot of controversy.
That's why I'm slightly curious, what do You think about systemd?
Do you think it's the evil that destroys the Linux, or a step forward?
Which init do you prefer?

Personally, I have more experience with systemd, as the distro I use everyday, ships with it by default.
While recognizing some of the systemd opposers claims (e.g. it's vastness), I don't think it's all that bad as people portray it.
But I can't say all that much, as I don't have a comparison, because of very little contact with old SystemV init.

So, what do you think? smile

Last edited by Toldierone (2016-06-15 20:19:33)


#2 2016-12-02 08:36:04

Registered: 2016-12-02
Posts: 1

Re: What's your opinion on systemd?

systemd is an init system used in Linux distributions to bootstrap the user space and manage all processes subsequently, instead of the UNIX System V or Berkeley Software Distribution (BSD) init systems.


#3 2016-12-02 08:43:05

Low End Boss
From: ~/
Registered: 2013-02-13
Posts: 3,498

Re: What's your opinion on systemd?

Its not a bad thing, it is just not a needed thing imo.

http://LittleHappyCloud.net KVM VPS with 1TB Bandwidth for €3.00


#4 2016-12-22 19:35:07

Trusted Member
Registered: 2015-08-21
Posts: 38

Re: What's your opinion on systemd?

Well, ... I guess after a long day of coding i am gonna take the bait wink

Sorry, this is going to be a bit of a rant i fear since i am one of those people who would'nt want to touch systemd with a giant pole. Don't get me wrong i have no problem with replacing SysV init. It works for me but it's neither very elegant nor without flaws. Thing is there is quite a bunch of different init systems out there predating systemd. People being bothered by SysV init is nothing new and if it were'nt for the convenience of just telling my package manager to install service x and be up and running id probably would have at least tried one or the other myself but having systemd shoved down my throat is what made me switch away from debian after 10+ years...

The problem with systemd is:

It is intransparent, featurecreeping junkage made by an utterly arrogant dev team to which defined scope is something you eat for breakfast. Head dev is the guy who brought everyone the pleasure of pulseaudio which for years gave linux the reputation of broken sound. Yeah, a decade later it's fixed (probably because it is'nt maintained by its inventor anymore...) but whats the huge improvement anyways? I am still using ALSA and with all its advanced features professionals won't touch pulseaudio since it downright blows for anything but desktop usage. I see a repeating pattern there. Lennart just likes to do things his way and let the world suffer... That guy should go make LennartOS and quit fucking up linux but oh well, he's being paid big $$$ by redhat. I don't think he could care less.

Sad thing is this time it's probably not going to be like the pulseaudio, which i have successfuly ignored for years and years. Systemd is an extremly invasive piece of software and with debian assimilated there is not much resistance left. If Lennart gets his way systemd will be tightly coupled with the kernel. What Linus Torvalds thinks of their code quality is widely known (quote: "I'm f*cking tired of the fact that you don't fix problems in the code *you* write, so that the kernel then has to work around the problems you cause.") but i fear that won't be enough to stop them and it's already hard enough to avoid systemd. It's simply not playing nice with anything else. It's eating up formerly independant parts left and right making people unable to run certain software unless their system is "initialized" by systemd and with no defined scope whatsoever it's only going to get worse. No, thanks.

When i look at all the complexity introduced for very questionable gain in form of busses, apis and whatnot i can only wonder if those guys want to recreate the unreliable blackbox that is windows. Systemd is'nt an init system but an OS redesign done by self absorbed morons and pushed through by big corporate money. Addressing the shortcommings of SysV init is one thing. Reinventing the wheel, making it square and painting it pink just because you think your the shit is another one. OK, to be fair its probably not just because of that but also to make linux idiot proof so every monkey with 1 week of training can deploy some enterprise grade rubbish they dont understand anyways at the click of a button making any kind of sane design pointless to them. I mean geez, systemd protects people by making sure /etc is mounted read-only. From what i wonder? I don't run anything that randomly writes there for no reason so what potentional risks are left? Oh yeah, it's me... Systemd feels like it should protect me from myself. How cute.

Basically, 90% of what systemd does ranges from pointless over absurd to downright scary. All in the name of fixing a problem that was'nt that big to begin with and got solved by other people before in sane ways. Thank you Lennart for making me one of those people running an obscure distro. Now i can finally ride servers with outdated systems until EOL and pray there will be an alternative when that day comes. I am sure you had many good reasons besides a major case of not invented here syndrome and general ignorant crazyness. I sure do...

Anyways i am out of coffee and there is way to much stuff for which one can bash systemd, its creators and everything around them (wheres those *kit rules again and what kind of garbage syntax is that?)... End of nerdrage wink

For a little less rantish perspective: http://suckless.org/sucks/systemd


#5 2017-01-19 21:57:07

Trusted Member
Registered: 2016-12-22
Posts: 255

Re: What's your opinion on systemd?

Needless overhead.



Board footer