Potentially this means that Fedora and CentOS stream do not get timely updates implemented in RHEL.

Canonical must be throwing a party, and I bet SUSE is not hating it either

    • pahakala@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      systemd is one of the best things that has happened with linux. Instead of random shell scripts that work differently on each distro, now you have a single ini conf file for your service that configures automatic restarts, sandboxing and activation in a easy to use way.

        • Wr4ith@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I mean a core issue is that it doesn’t adhere to the unix principle of do one thing and do it well. Aside from that it essentially creates a middle layer where things can happen without you really knowing it’s happening. If you haven’t I’d suggest running a couple of different init systems to see what I mean.

          I’m ambivalent, I like systemd because it’s convenient, but I also like openrc because it’s simple.

        • sarsaparilyptus@lemmy.fmhy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t like systemd. Reasons:

          • broad scope and lots of dependencies are more or less the exact opposite design philosophy of *nix

          • putting too many eggs in one basket intrinsically increases the attack vector and also decreases stability

          • bloated

          Most importantly:

          • Gives Red Hat i.e. IBM too much influence over Linux
          • bane_killgrind@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            A specific design philosophy that is adhered to means the software has greater interoperability, reliability, and maintainability. When you are criticising something that adheres to a design philosophy, communicate how it’s adhering to that philosophy to it’s own detriment.

        • eltimablo@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          They see all the other stuff that gets packaged under the systemd name and assume it’s non-optional. While many distributions do, annoyingly, ship the auxiliary packages like resolved by default, they’re not required if you just want to use the init system, and honestly they kind of strike me as an attempt to supplement or replace some of the incumbent components of your average distro.

          Systemd-resolved can suck my whole grundle, though.

    • RangerHere@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      If you don’t mind me asking, why do you not like systemd? I like it a lot and in my humble opinion it makes life really easy.

    • SubArcticTundra@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      This literally feels like the geek equivalent of culture wars stoked to divide people just for the sake of it

    • NikkiNikkiNikki@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      APT is the mess, I’ve never had more issues with broken packages and unbreakable dependency cycles than with APT