systemd was a solution in search of a problem. I saw it that way when it came along and still see it that way. I’m sure as usual that will ruffle the feathers of the zealots and fanatics. So be it. I’m not expressing their opinion on systemd but my own. I don’t see how its an improvement sysvinit. I can’ do the same things with both and indeed still maintain a sysvinit linux system that works just fine without systemd being involved.
You didn’t realize there was a problem to solve because others, the distro maintainers and developers, worked their asses off to solve that problem for you.
Standard boiler plate response to not having had to ever do this. I started with Slackware Linux and still keep a installation around to keep up with how things work. I solve my own problems and its for that reason You’re explanation falls short. In truth it isn’t that difficult and it many ways preferable to not hand over control of services to one over reaching controller. I’ve had systemd hangup where sysv would have just kept on sailing.
Its perhaps because I have so much experience with both that I can truly see how systemd isn’t the cure all its purported to be.
Why would I go read through another thread someone posted about the same fud? This somehow constitutes proof since it backs up your bias. Its the same old argument without any real examples. Only generalizations. Plus its from a arch post. If you are going to use arch why not just fall back to Slackware for your daily driver? I don’t have any more trouble with sysv than I do with systemd. You have failed utterly to present anything compelling to alter my perception of this situation.
systemd was a solution in search of a problem. I saw it that way when it came along and still see it that way. I’m sure as usual that will ruffle the feathers of the zealots and fanatics. So be it. I’m not expressing their opinion on systemd but my own. I don’t see how its an improvement sysvinit. I can’ do the same things with both and indeed still maintain a sysvinit linux system that works just fine without systemd being involved.
Systemd solved lots of problems for me and made things easier so you know… I guess they succeeded.
Such as?
Such as initscripts being a nightmare to maintain, and insufficient for the complexity of a modern system. Read about it here: https://redlib.privacyredirect.com/r/archlinux/comments/4lzxs3/why_did_archlinux_embrace_systemd/
You didn’t realize there was a problem to solve because others, the distro maintainers and developers, worked their asses off to solve that problem for you.
Standard boiler plate response to not having had to ever do this. I started with Slackware Linux and still keep a installation around to keep up with how things work. I solve my own problems and its for that reason You’re explanation falls short. In truth it isn’t that difficult and it many ways preferable to not hand over control of services to one over reaching controller. I’ve had systemd hangup where sysv would have just kept on sailing.
Its perhaps because I have so much experience with both that I can truly see how systemd isn’t the cure all its purported to be.
Now go back and actually read what I linked. The comments too. And don’t dismiss those points just because the old ways work for you.
Why would I go read through another thread someone posted about the same fud? This somehow constitutes proof since it backs up your bias. Its the same old argument without any real examples. Only generalizations. Plus its from a arch post. If you are going to use arch why not just fall back to Slackware for your daily driver? I don’t have any more trouble with sysv than I do with systemd. You have failed utterly to present anything compelling to alter my perception of this situation.
deleted by creator