Linux

Where did you get this idea?

I didn’t knew about Microsoft taking over the fsf either, and I am getting concerned about the real freedom behind my beloved Linux.

I think you are confusing FSF with the Linux Foundation, and you can see MS as part of the platinum LF members. Was that it, or you really meant FSF?

I don't understand what you are talking about.

I like reading a post with a clear topic and reasoning, unfortunately it's not obivous to me.

Something like "I dislike systemd because XY. What do you think?" Would help me.

I really love all the 5+ years old articles about why systemd sucks.
It's not perfect but it's so much better than the plethora of different init methods Linux used to have. Also managing sysv init scripts sucked really bad.
It's lightweight, most of it is optional, it's declarative, it makes managing your systems much easier and it just works.

Systemd has more features than old SysV init scripts. Particularly around detecting events and taking actions such as starting firewalls when joining networks, turning on battery tools when unplugged from a charger, starting new services when connected to a dock etc.

The other things it does, it does more reliably than sysV init scripts. It starts services concurrently, provides a profiler to improve start up time, contains much less code, provides better security to tapping into the container features of Linux.

Systemd is a good init system. Better than any of the alternatives, although they've also come a long way since systemd first came around. It's also a weird interconnected mess of a thousand other things that probably shouldn't all be lumped together into a single project. Half of them are absolutely vital to the vast majority of Linux systems, and half of them are unused and neglected and no one has touched them in years, but they're all stuck together in one weird project for some reason.

That's kind of the exact same sort of situation xorg was in 20 years ago. I am concerned that systemd is going to turn into the next xorg, but really those concerns are the only reason most people should consider an alternative. If you don't care about that, you probably don't need to worry about systemd.

How do you know a post was written by a systemd hater? Easy, they'll spell it with a big D for some reason. It reminds me of how Norwegian rabid anti-cyclists are unable to spell "cyclist" for some reason.

Claiming you don't want to restart an old debate and then trying to restart it anyway is pretty funny.

You might also want to keep in mind that you can't really force an init system on Linux distros. Systemd became the norm through being preferred, as in, the people using and maintaining it think it's good. At this point you might as well be ranting about how "LinuX is evil somehow" and we should all be using GNU HURD or Minix or something.

Also: Haven't thought about suckless in well over a decade, maybe closer to two? I guess way back in the day I was kinda intrigued by their ideas and used some of their products; these days I'd rather see them as something between an art shop and people who are playing a somewhat unusual game with themselves, but not particularly relevant to mainstream software engineering.

Systemd provides a modern user space which fixes a huge number of problems. At first I found it difficult to learn but it had things I needed and I made the effort. I will always be nostalgic about things before systemd because I started using linux in the mid 90s.

I'm not going to throw away my GPU and multi-core CPU and go back to a 386 running dos because multithreaded applications and speculative execution scare me. There is no way to match what modern systems can do by taking old architectures and just adding more gates or faster clock speeds. And there are parallels in software architecture.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with running a BSD or a non-systemd linux distro if you like. They are still perfectly usable in a lot of situations doing the same stuff people did for years in these systems. If you have a server with a static set of devices that runs a fixed set of services at startup you don't really need systemd. I still have some systems like that but systemd also handles those cases more efficiently and robustly.

You see these sort of link dumps from people who think vaccines cause autism or that some diet will cure cancer. Whatever the intention behind it I always associate it with a bad faith attempt to fuck with people's heads by bamboozling them with more information than they can rationally analyze.

Believe what you want but you might want to consider that all the experts working on systemd and using it productively might know their shit.

i like systemd

Lennart Poettering intends to replace "sudo" with #systemd's run0. Here's a quick PoC to demonstrate root permission hijacking by exploiting the fact "systemd-run" (the basis of uid0/run0, the sudo replacer) creates a user owned pty for communication with the new "root" process.

To my understanding that actually solves issues. A lot of ppl already prefer other tools like doas since sudo is basically "too big" for what it does.

More code means more potential bugs. run0 has to my knowledge significantly less code. And the benefit of not relying on SUID.

In the end, you do you. The big distros will adopt what is good for them and good to maintain. You do not have to use it.

Gentoo user here too. I once switched to systemd, but didn't stay using it for too long. Back then some things didn't work with systemd. Nowdays my systems use seatd instead of logind or elogind. Some have musl toolchain. It's just simpler, currently, for me to use OpenRC on all of my setups. But the thing I most disliked with systemd was that it cannot work without journald.

I've never used another init system, but i see no problem with systemd. The declaritive approach makes things very robust. Surely some things can be improved, but it's a good tool.

Edit: Also managing user services the same way is nice.

TL;DR