Permanently Deleted

    • SolidaritySplodarity [they/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      It tries to do a lot in a very centralized way and (initially) didn't have many devs so it was kinda risky.

      Because it does so much and is centralized, making something that works with it can sometimes be quite the pain. Some init systems just require you to write a script, for example. One little file. systemd requires at least its own special service file and if you want to do anything more complex there are 5-10 subcomponents you might have to study for a while before you can begin.

      I think it's a good direction, though. I'd much rather see iterations on this one central system where you can find/edit/start/stop/log services than fight with some random hackneyed init system.

      • captcha [any]
        ·
        4 years ago

        BROKE: Getting mad at systemd

        WOKE: Getting mad at pulseaudio and pipewire.

      • skeletorsass [she/her]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Systemd unit file are not so hard to write really and are much more robust than older script systems, which are usually held together with tape and do not handle failure well. They were always one of the worst design choices of UNIX and are extremely fragile, to order especially. Systemd also keep a central state for services, which is very logical and necessary to manage services to modern standard.

    • spez_hole [he/him,they/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      I'd like to interject for just a moment. What you're referring to as GNU/Linux is actually just one free component of a fully functioning systemd system.