Interesting, am on Arch, which was pretty much the first distro to adopt systemd, so it's possible it's been integrated better, but I have no problems with systemd.

I did in fact had many problems with sysvinit, where the disorganized patchwork of individual scripts with slightly different capabilities for each made these problems hard and time consuming to debug.

I don't know what 'conflicts with kernel defaults' is supposed to mean, but I don't suffer from them.


I also operate several servers with systemd without issues.

Am slightly bothered by people who when they see a problem automatically seem to blame it on systemd itself, rather than perhaps their config, distro defaults, the flags it is compiled with in the repos etc. Seems a bit like working backward from a conclusion.

As for "the Unix philosophy" argument, I don't buy it. Some of it was due to technical limitations of the hardware in the 70s.


C is also technically the UNIX philosophy, yet there were many safer, better designed languages even at the time and now especially. Just because something has been around a long time doesn't mean it is the best. That's a surprisingly conservative stance when it comes to technology. Rust, Pony etc. are showing that low level systems programming could do a lot better than C, why not apply the same to the rest of the ecosystem?


Sign in to participate in the conversation
Matej Lach's mastodon

The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!