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 598977
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

He is not making the decision... I find it funny that people are always banging on about how great linux is, because if you don't like something, you can view the code and rewrite it yourself... poettering has... and everyone is complaining that he shouldn't have... well that's what happens if you keep banging on about people being able to write their own code.

While I'm sure you can find a few quotes of individuals saying Poettering should never have written systemd, that isn't the stance of most people who oppose it. They don't object to the existence of systemd. They object to it being a dependency on a substantial number of other programs. That's what this editorial was about. It becomes effectively impossible to use the distro without it. And that most certain is someone else making the decision for everyone.

Reply Parent Score: 5