systemd cat and GNU cat hugging a Linux cat.

  • Lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    33·
    38 minutes ago

    systemd is fine. The only people I’ve ever heard complain about it are lonely neckbeards pretending like their opinion somehow matters.

    I’ve used Debian as a server system since it was using init.d. And do you know what I found? systemd is easier. And the fact that Debian of all distros decided to use it says a lot.

  • Raccoonn@lemmy.ml
    6·
    4 hours ago

    System service managers like systemd, OpenRC, runit, or SysVinit often come down to user preference. While these systems are crucial for initializing and managing services on servers, where uptime, resource allocation, and specific daemon behaviors are important, their impact on a typical desktop or laptop is generally minimal.

    For most personal devices, the primary functions of a service manager occur largely out of sight. As long as the system boots reliably and applications run smoothly, the underlying service manager rarely registers as a significant factor in the daily user experience.

    For many, including myself, systemd simply works without much fuss. My choice to stick with it isn’t due to strong conviction or deep technical analysis, but rather the simple fact that I’ve rarely, if ever, had to interact with it directly. For my personal desktop and laptop, it reliably handles booting, service management, and shutdown in the background. If it’s not broken and isn’t hindering my daily computing, there’s no compelling reason to explore alternatives.

    • corsicanguppy@lemmy.caEnglish
      1·
      2 hours ago

      System service managers like systemd, OpenRC, runit, or SysVinit often come down to user preference.

      And coding best-practice. And a philosophy borne of bad luck and bad software that aims to resist monoculture.

      But that lennart kid is cool for a Microsoft employee.

    • mittorn@masturbated.one
      01·
      4 hours ago

      @furycd001 @nutbutter Technically, it’s broken. If you run screen/tmux built without systemd support, it will be killed on logout. Systemd requires every program that needs daemonize link libsystemd0 only to notify systemd to keep it running. So it’s broken, but worked-around in every software which need daemonize

      • Lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        2·
        46 minutes ago

        So, running a program incompatible with a particular system leads to incompatibilities?

        Wow, who’d have thought…

  • boaratio@lemmy.world
    318·
    7 hours ago

    So the old init.d system was better? Come on people, let’s stop infighting. I have zero preference on init systems. You know why? Because they’re just plumbing. Stop this nonsense. Do I click on an init system? Do I use the init system to check my email? Or play games? No. I know poettering can be controversial, but let’s just move on. Run freebsd if you’re so butt hurry.

    • dblsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de
      191·
      6 hours ago

      Yeah, on a desktop I don’t really mind whatever*. On a server however, I think systemd is great and I wouldn’t want to miss it anymore.

      * except Debian’s frankenstein systemd + sysvinit combination. Burn it

  • serenissi@lemmy.world
    5·
    6 hours ago

    There are few system manager (single project or a mix of components) that use linux features efficiently and none have dev resource remotely comparable to systemd. That’s why in practice systemd is the best system layer implementation on gnu/linux. Android and chromeos userland (upstart derived) are not exactly (freedesktop) gnu/linux.

    EDIT: the post ask which OS though. Including userland I like android a lot, but I would say illumos distros (OI currently). illumos has a system management similar to systemd (contracts in place of cgroups for example). Actually systemd was heavily inspired by SMF too.

  • communism@lemmy.ml
    3·
    6 hours ago

    Alpine Linux would be my favourite, although I only use it as a server distro. I use Artix as my daily driver for personal computers because of the AUR and glibc (Alpine is musl). I also enjoy Void but it’s not got as much software as Artix repos + AUR.

    • libre@badatbeing.socialEnglish
      2·
      3 hours ago

      I’ve used Alpine for desktop, it’s honestly pretty good, small footprint and has most major desktops and their goodies. If you’re desperate for something out of the norm you still have flatpak.

      • communism@lemmy.ml
        1·
        1 hour ago

        I’m sure it is good for a lot of use-cases, but I want to be able to e.g. play video games without issue. Which is far easier on a glibc system.

  • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
    354·
    10 hours ago

    As a user, why should I care whether the distro I use uses systemd? I use Mint and I don’t remember having to interact with that kind of low-level nonsense. The distro maintainers can use whatever reasoning they want to pick these details.

    • DefederateLemmyMl@feddit.nl
      1·
      8 minutes ago

      As a user, why should I care whether the distro I use uses systemd?

      Um, because as a user you may have to deal with services, or other systemd features?

      Let’s say you want to start ssh-agent when you login to your desktop environment. Well, there’s a systemd service for that that you can enable, and on another distro you’d have to do it another way (autostart script or something).

    • notabot@piefed.socialEnglish
      7·
      6 hours ago

      If you are just a user, in that a computer is just a tool you use, then you’re right, there’s comparatively little reason to be concerened or even know about the underlying details of the system. If you go further and start making changes to your system, or even building more complex systems, over time you will find yourself forming quite firm opinions about various parts of the underlying system, especially if you’ve had experience with other options.

    • kautau@lemmy.world
      12·
      9 hours ago

      Tribalism exists in every circle, perhaps moreso in tech circles. Ironically anyone who hates on a distro could just switch, or build their own distro if they were so inclined, but it’s often the hating that people participate more in than using their system. Use what works for you, and if it no longer works for you use something else.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    2·
    6 hours ago

    MacOS. I use Linux for servers, Mac for daily driver. Windows for zilch, only at my job because I have to.

    • rtxn@lemmy.worldM
      19·
      8 hours ago

      Some people think it handles too many low-level systems. It’s a valid concern because if systemd itself were to become compromised (like Xz Utils was) or a serious bug was introduced, all of the userland processes would be affected. People who are stuck in the 90s and think that the Unix philosophy is still relevant will also point out that it’s a needlessly complex software suite and we should all go back to writing initscripts in bash.

      Red Hat, the owner of systemd, has also had its fair share of controversies. It’s a company that many distrust.

      Ultimately, those whose opinion mattered the most decided that systemd’s benefits outweigh the risks and drawbacks. Debian held a vote to determine the project’s future regarding init systems. Arch Linux replaced initscripts because systemd was simply better, and replicating and maintaining its features (like starting services once their dependencies are running) with initscripts would’ve been unjustifiably complicated.

    • cepelinas@sopuli.xyz
      81·
      8 hours ago

      Nothing, it’s just bloated but in practice if your system meets normal distros system requirements systemd isn’t going to make that much of a difference in practical use.

    • mittorn@masturbated.one
      73·
      9 hours ago

      @Gork @nutbutter just look at /proc/1/maps on systemd-powered system :)
      I do not see any reason keeping all of this in init. It might be implemented in optional lightweight services, not in single monster-binary