[flagged]
What do you recommend instead?
[deleted]
Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
31–40 of 179 posts
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#32[flagged]
What do you recommend instead?
I would like to recommend Mate, which is a continuation of Gnome 2.
I like to think of my Desktop Environment as little as possible - if I'm thinking about it it's usually because it's getting in my way. In particular, I switched to Mate when the Gnome 3 team went Steve Jobs on us and implemented menus that couldn't be moved out of the way and a new desktop philosophy that didn't fit my current workflow. Gnome 2 worked just fine for my everyday work so by choosing Mate I know I'm getting a responsive, functional Destop Env. that won't throw random surprises at me.
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are not lawyers. I don't care what their "parent" company is legally. In practice, IBM influences and affects every single decision of these projects/companies. So yes, It is their parent company. Just look at what they were doing to X11. Holding it's development back just to monopolize wayland more.
How were they holding X11 back? No one wanted to support it, not just Red Hat.
Nah man you don't get it. They were "monetizing" Wayland. Whatever that means. It's certainly not because X is an insanely old and difficult to maintain codebase with questionable design decisions.
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
How were they holding X11 back? No one wanted to support it, not just Red Hat.
Read the news. That's why the maintainers forked it and are starting improvements on their own project. https://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-users/2025/06/06/msg032... https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver
> Read the news. That's why the maintainers forked it
It looks more like one maintainer, and it's really not clear if his problem was with corporate control, or if he just fell out with everybody.
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
How were they holding X11 back? No one wanted to support it, not just Red Hat.
Read the news. That's why the maintainers forked it and are starting improvements on their own project. https://mail-index.netbsd.org/netbsd-users/2025/06/06/msg032... https://github.com/X11Libre/xserver
Not a maintainer. A disgruntled developer. And one with questionable patches. Please read the gitlab discussions before coming to this conclusion.
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#36I just registered for comment here: they always refused to admit it (by "they" I mean Fedora/IBM) but we will end up having a Gnome OS for the general public... And I'm afraid the 3E rule is starting to be applied (Extended already, Embraced in all the "other OS" and now...)
[flagged]
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#37[flagged]
What do you recommend instead?
Linux Mint Cinnamon. Classic desktop. Just works.
Yes wayland support is still experimental but I don't understand why you would voluntarily use it at its current change. X11 works perfectly fine.
Also good old Xfce. Honestly, even KDE is pretty decent again these days, I have heard. As Linux users we are spoilt with great options.
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#38The fact that the next blog post (linked at the bottom of the article) is titled "a desktop for all" is deliciously ironic in context.
For all in this context does not mean “all the infinite combinations of software for people that refuse to adopt the status quo”
systemd is here to stay. It is ludicrous to imagine everybody to keep supporting that 1% that is ideologically opposed to it, no? As those people love to say, open-source is written by volunteers, you can always fork it.
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#39This is a sensible move. systemd is a good piece of software, and foundational Linux infrastructure which by now is very widely deployed.
I’ve been doing Linux a long time and my experience is that systemd is much more pleasant to work with than the brittle duct tape and shell script stuff which came before.
Re: Introducing stronger dependencies on systemd
#40I have yet to hear an argument against systemd which isn’t a variation of:
- """bloat"""
- I dislike Poettering. Remember pulseaudio?
- a core user-space layer for modern applications that can’t only rely on the spartan kernel syscall API? Literally 1984.
Given that systemd is good enough and is running on 99% of desktops and servers, I always find it hilarious to see how the vocal minority is overrepresented on this forum.