Why was systemd so contreversial? Why was something like systemd neccesary given the history of bootstrap systems?

>>105913583 (OP)
redhat merely wished it and it happened.

>>105913583 (OP)
Mostly because Lennart is a dickhead

Why did you spell it contreversial twice it really annoyed me, anyway runit is gooder than systemd

It's good in the technical sense, but not in the moral sense.
If you're running a system without systemd, you can also choose not to run syslog, chron, et cetera. This is what
Systemd insists on running a journal in the background that drags the system down with it if you try to kill it. This is what monolithism looks like.

It was controversial because autistic hobbyists don't like "da non-unix like bloat". Systemd has universal adoption because actual professionals like it

>>105913583 (OP)
Because linuxfags hate having an actual Operating System instead of a kernel with random packages.

>>105913583 (OP)
It was controversial because was literally shoved down anyone throat regardless of the actual usecase (as it happened with pulseaudio, picrel he's me thinking about lennart when pulseaudio was rolled out and replaced alsa). Also all big DEs build hard dependencies on it giving a literal gigantic fuck you to all non-linux unix systems, which required a lot of effort from the community to dissect the parts of it strictly needed (elogin, libsystemd) for running those enviroments and subsystems that were initially shipped monolithically with lennart shit. Also it's fucking bloated, most of the OSes out there onky need an init system for initing shit, nothing more and nothing less.

>>105913583 (OP)
redhat and it's corporate interests with investors who have interests of their own, none of which align with open source

launchd already existed and was ported to other systems but instead of just adopting a single standard for everyone to use they made a brand new one that only worked on Linux initially and forced developers and package maintainers to write new init scripts and do all kinds of new integrations just to have the same featureset we already had.

>>105913583 (OP)
it violates basic principles of the unix philosophy and no one was given a choice

now it’s almost inescapable unless you run one of the few remaining distros who haven’t caved like gentoo, void and artix

>>105914060
Also Devuan, it is to them existing that it was possible for Debian to have multiple init options as well.

>>105913705
>>105913894
>2 shekels were deposited in your account

Wayyyy back when systemd was really new and optional on Arch I switched because it promised that starting daemons in parallel would give you a huge boot time boost and not having to think about which daemons need to be in which order at boot sounded bretty good and way easier. Idk what the fuck happened after that, it got so big that it's almost a tiny OS on its own.

>>105913583 (OP)
linux users complain that most third party corporations creating firmware, drivers, software, etc only catered to windows. Which meant that the linux community itself had to do extra work to get the aforementioned products to work properly on linux. We were essentially treated like 3rd class citizens.

Weirdly, now, a lot of software devs developing for linux only cater to systemd out of the box, essentially doing the same thing they complained that others did before them. Now non-systemd distros, their devs, and their communities have to do extra work to writing scripts so that these projects work on their distros and operating systems (*BSD) as well.

As the other anon said, instead of adopting a unified standard that would work with literally any system and cause apps to work universally out of the box, they decided to create something new that drove the unix community as a whole into this shitty situation we're in.
What's annoying is, the universal standard preceded systemd.

>>105913583 (OP)
a bunch of tech conservacucks just scared of new things. you can observe the same thing right now with wayland and llms.

>>105914298
>2 shekels were deposited in your account

>>105914298
idk who you're trying to impress with posts like these

>>105914261
i also switched when arch did, /13 YEARS AGO/. like damn, if you don't want to use it, don't, but why are we still talking about it?

>>105914341
because systemd is destroying how services and daemons work on non-systemd systems including the entire *BSD family of distros.

>>105914571
bsd is not linux's problem

>>105914571
>>105914619
that's perhaps a bit too dismissive, my point is that if something chooses to only work with systemd, making things difficult for bsd, then talk to said software. bsd is even more niche than linux, they probably hadn't even considered it

>>105913583 (OP)
biggest controversy is that linux hobbyist community still thinks and believes that development and changes to gnu linux are somehow taking into account their autistic obsession with tinkering
whilst in fact, gnu linux is primarily developed and maintained for enterprise infrastructure, and all changes are aimed at and focused on enterprise market, where selinux/systemd/wayland are a justified need for enhanced system security (both servers and thin desktop clients)
systemd drama was present only among 1% of gnu linux usecases (autistic tinkering), while other 99% of actually relevant usecases (enterprise) are more than happy with it. same story with wayland right this moment.
autistic tinkers are given an option to fork and self-support outdated and deprecated technologies, but they chose not to (because they are incapable of doing so) - they are arrogant enough to demand for large enterprise to cater towards their autistic needs. this is the true and actual power of open source: dont like something? - well, fork it and maintain it yourself.

>>105913594
Why did redhat want it?

>>105913628
Who is lennart?

>>105913583 (OP)
It is an inside job

>>105914261
>Wayyyy back when systemd was really new and optional on Arch I switched because it promised that starting daemons in parallel would give you a huge boot time boost
You could already do that by adding an '@' in front of the daemon in your rc.conf

Remember when being able set everything easily in your rc.conf was a selling point of Arch? Now everything is separated into a million obscure files.

>>105914743
systemd doesn't make anything more secure
instead it introduced a ton of severe vulnerabilities

>>105914743
systemd is less secure with an attack surface 100x larger than any other init system

if anything, there are arguments to be made that systemd is a deliberate and successful attempt at corporate espionage to introduce security flaws to linux.

>>105917606
guy who turned the linux environment from a kernel + patchwork of apps into a centralized programmable system like windows (in short he doesnt understand unix is a programmer not an IT person ) systemd was IT vs devs. devs won .

what is a recent systemd hack that fucked anons computers?

>>105918530
>being able set everything easily in your rc.conf was a selling point of Arch? Now everything is separated into a million obscure files
yeah thats how things are done now. the fact about having nice things is you cant in a non Christian world