Remarks about the benchmark

> anti-unix.

Systemd is anti-Unix is the same what that Linux is anti-Unix. Which is to say "Everything and yet nothing at all".

I mean... were do people keep getting this sort of crap from?

It doesn't really matter what is technically superior here. If Debian picks a inferior choice all it means is that they are going to have to work harder to get to the same place that they would be at if they choose a good technical choice.

The worst thing Debian can possibly do is starting trying to force everybody to support 3 different init systems. It's insanity. This way they will NEVER reach the same level as if they choose poorly.

> not everyone is buying this,
That doesn't alter the fact. With systemd, you essentially don't have to configure service dependencies any longer due to socket/dbus activation autofs support, and it does a much better job at starting services when they're needed (i. e. launch bluetoothd when a USB bluetooth dongle is plugged in etc.). Its configuration file format is also very simple and amenable to manipulation with automated tools. And these are just a few random benefits, there are literally dozens of other things that systemd does better than the competition.

> esp when it's anti-unix.
I'm not even sure whether that's really true, but to be honest, I don't care either. The so-called unix philosophy is in large part a manifestation of the constraints of the seventies' and eighties' environments. People should move on and accept that many new and clever ideas about how to write software have emerged since then.