Linked by jessesmith on Wed 5th Nov 2014 10:39 UTC
Linux Over the past year I've been reading a lot of opinions on the new init technology, systemd. Some people think systemd is wonderful, the bee's knees. Others claim that systemd is broken by design. Some see systemd as a unifying force, a way to unite the majority of the Linux distributions. Others see systemd as a growing blob that is slowly becoming an overly large portion of the operating system. One thing that has surprised me a little is just how much people care about systemd, whether their opinion of the technology is good or bad. People in favour faithfully (and sometimes falsely) make wonderful claims about what systemd is and what it can supposedly do. Opponents claim systemd will divide the Linux community and drive many technical users to other operating systems. There is a lot of hype and surprisingly few people presenting facts.
Permalink for comment 598965
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Systemd is about unifying Linux with a Core OS that is rigorously tested and well integrated, as opposed to the hodge-podge of random bash scripts that people used to have to write for sysv.

There's really no need for choice in init systems; upstart is soon to be unmaintained, openRC is not capable, sys V is a joke.
Systemd is the only modern option, and by leveraging every strength Linux offers, and ignoring BSD compatibility, it pushes forwards the Linux platform.

The individuals arguing against systemd seem to not understand that *none of the upstream developers* want to have to keep reinventing wheels and having overhead in maintenance when they can get universal, superior options from systemd, such as logind.

In short, the future of Linux is systemd. If you don't like that, move to an actual unix.

Reply Score: 8