I vary between a resounding meh and feeling a tired exasperation with the people responsible. (Which is kind of how I feel about grub, too.)
I’d rather write a BSD or sysV init script than a systemd simple unit file any day. When done properly a script gives more control with less ugly syntactic sugar.
I wish more distros had rejected it, so there would be more diversity in the linux software ecosystem. But just like grub, systemd appears to be here to stay as the dominant player.
I kind of figured, with your comment about POSIX compliance. My big gripe with systemd is that it just tries to do too much, and is incredibly un-unix like in that respect. It has buy in from Mr. Torvalds though, so all the Linux fankids that think the sun shines out of his ass, and it’s all about comparing Linux to Windows, give it an automatic pass.
Oh, absolutely. I think everyone who pays attention to such things agrees that it’s architecturally unsound in concept, but it’s pretty easy to make the argument that orthodoxy isn’t the best path to innovation.
Very little, really. None of the luke-warm praise Linus has given systemd has come without caveats, generally including explicit disapproval of binary logging and pointed criticism of the behavior of Poettering and Sievers. Apparently that’s enough for Red Hat to keep going full steam ahead, though.
Did I accidently end up on slashdot?
No it’s “tech club” and the first rule of tech club… (Darn, I’m already failing…)
Off by one error.
This topic was automatically closed after 324 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
