|
|
Log in / Subscribe / Register

The Grumpy Editor's guide to surviving the systemd debate

The Grumpy Editor's guide to surviving the systemd debate

Posted Nov 22, 2014 18:16 UTC (Sat) by thedevil (guest, #32913)
In reply to: The Grumpy Editor's guide to surviving the systemd debate by anselm
Parent article: The Grumpy Editor's guide to surviving the systemd debate

"sufficiently unhappy with systemd to actually roll up their
sleeves to come up with something"

"nobody so far has condescended to propose a better design"

You assume this is just due to laziness or pure troll malice, but
I think there is more to it. By all signs systemd's design _as
an init replacement_ is excellent, and that's why we don't see
any alternative proposals from qualified people. The problem
with systemd is its ever increasing scope, devouring (and
changing beyond recognition) more and more parts of the base
system. The solution isn't a complete redesign but splitting it
up, but that can only be done either 1. with the help of
upstream, which has not been forthcoming, or 2. by forking it.


to post comments

The Grumpy Editor's guide to surviving the systemd debate

Posted Nov 23, 2014 2:43 UTC (Sun) by seyman (subscriber, #1172) [Link] (1 responses)

> The solution isn't a complete redesign but splitting it up

Given how modular systemd is, I'm not convinced splitting it up would be a huge gain. Perhaps what's needed is a document explaining how to disable all non-core features and how to re-enable them once you're comfortable with your running system.

The Grumpy Editor's guide to surviving the systemd debate

Posted Nov 23, 2014 7:13 UTC (Sun) by brodo (subscriber, #4049) [Link]

> Perhaps what's needed is a document explaining how to disable all non-core features and how to re-enable them once you're comfortable with your running system.

... or even something like "make config".


Copyright © 2026, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds