Arguments against systemd

From Without Systemd
Revision as of 20:24, 27 March 2018 by Kriv (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents


Conceptional problems

Debunking the myth of unit files being significantly shorter than scripts used by all other init systems: A side-by-side look at run scripts and service units

Poor design

Scope creep

Systemd anigif.gif

Systemd scopecreep chart.png

Scope creep leads to vulnerabilities

Absurd bugs and responses

Breaking promises and immaturity

"After udev is merged into the systemd tree you can still build it for usage outside of systemd systems, and we will support these builds officially. In fact, we will be supporting this for a long time"

"...this will effectively also mean that we will not support non-systemd systems with udev anymore starting at that point. Gentoo folks, this is your wakeup call."

Linux (kernel) coup attempt: "kdbus support is no longer compile-time optional ... We encourage all downstream distributions to begin testing kdbus by adding it to the kernel images in the development distributions, and leaving kdbus support in systemd enabled." comment on this on LKML

"The kdbuswreck"

"kdbus now out-of-tree"

"kdbus dropped in favor of BUS1"

unmet stability promises:

To quote from the systemd stability promise:

"Starting with version 26 (the first version released with Fedora 15) we promise to keep a number of them stable and compatible for the future."

One of their promises is for the export format:

"Entry metadata that is not actually a field is serialized like it was a field, but beginning with two underscores. "

This is not true for version 44 of systemd for example.

Ignorance of fundamental operating system concepts


further reading: additional links

The new order.jpg

Personal tools