systemd desperately needs competition. it isnt just that it became a dependency for every low level service and a potential vector for privacy invasion, it's also janky to use.
where is it janky?
His imagination.
Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
11–20 of 168 posts
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#12You do not have to use all resources that are under the systemd umbrella. That's just BS, sorry. And prod deployments breaking... Well I guess that never happened with those best-managed sysv init scripts?
Guys, pick your fights reasonably.
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#13Interesting that it's kind of that simple. It looks almost like you could make a fairly straightforward fork that works with that, as long as they sysvinit packages are kept up-to-date.
I have to say while I dislike systemd it hasn't annoyed me enough to send me down that route yet.
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#14You do not have to use all resources that are under the systemd umbrella. That's just BS, sorry. And prod deployments breaking... Well I guess that never happened with those best-managed sysv init scripts? Guys, pick your fights reasonably.
I've never *ever* broken a production system by reconfiguring a sysvinit service, at all, no no no, not me...
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#15I find it fascinating how different people are with respect to being able to see the future, or at least caring about it. I find many people are like lumbering beasts in a forest complaining when a twig pokes them in the eye. While other saw the forest from miles away and just went around it. Gentoo is still home to a sizeable number of users who noped out of systemd more than 10 years ago. This is exactly the kind o…
>Why does it take others so long to see the same thing?
What thing, exactly? To me systemd has done what it has set out to do and I quite like it for it (not that it's perfect in every respect, but it's in general a welcome improvement on what came before it, especially in terms of consistency between distros instead of a million arbitrary differences). It's also important to note what systemd was offering to distro maintainers, as well. It substantially reduced the work involved in creating and packaging for a distro (though probably only Arch, which is explicitly a distro by and for the maintainers, really said that part loudly).
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#16You do not have to use all resources that are under the systemd umbrella. That's just BS, sorry. And prod deployments breaking... Well I guess that never happened with those best-managed sysv init scripts? Guys, pick your fights reasonably.
I've never *ever* broken a production system by reconfiguring a sysvinit service, at all, no no no, not me...
Absolutely not!
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#17I find it fascinating how different people are with respect to being able to see the future, or at least caring about it. I find many people are like lumbering beasts in a forest complaining when a twig pokes them in the eye. While other saw the forest from miles away and just went around it. Gentoo is still home to a sizeable number of users who noped out of systemd more than 10 years ago. This is exactly the kind o…
> Gentoo is still home to a sizeable number of users who noped out of systemd more than 10 years ago. As a Gentoo user for the past ~quarter-century, I'd say that it's more that -unlike Debian- Gentoo has been using a system service manager that's way better than the classic SysV init for approximately forever. The early discussion of systemd-as-init [0] was pretty much 100% focused on how much better systemd-as-init…
Yes, exactly.
"Systemd-vs-SysV" was never the concern for me personally, it was always "Systemd as the last init we ever create" based on how it's being built, and I always tried to argue that it was a hard pill to swallow because there were already better foundations in the world (SMF, for my favourite example), people didn't want to have that discussion, they just wanted to talk about how bad SysV was and that systemd was progress... I was impeding progress...
But, we're here now, and replacing systemd at this point will require being API and bug compatible or else major software (like GNOME) won't run at all.
So, systemd is the last init we'll ever have, just like I feared.
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#18Tbh, the installer was inevitable after systemd integrated a bootloader, crafted a paritioning scheme for autodiscovery, took over user and home directory management, and topped it off with an updater and "system extensions" layering system that some immutable distros are using. I'm not saying any of this is particularly bad but it's been very clear fot a while that systemd just wants to be an OS. With immutable syst…
Can't these features be toggled?
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#19systemd desperately needs competition. it isnt just that it became a dependency for every low level service and a potential vector for privacy invasion, it's also janky to use.
> systemd desperately needs competition
Maybe it's too late.
LP is cooking a way to deny system modifications [1]
Re: Replacing Systemd with OpenRC in Debian
#20systemd desperately needs competition. it isnt just that it became a dependency for every low level service and a potential vector for privacy invasion, it's also janky to use.
I do agree it needs competition. The more the better. The dependency thing is bad but it's free software. It will always be possible to route around that if it ever turns into a problem. Especially now that we have LLMs.
I don't think it's janky though. It's pretty great. It has an answer to everything I've ever needed from it.