Why is Systemd so bad? Doesn't tails/debian use it?
Genuine question as I know hating systemd is memed all over the chans but I have yet to hear why.
Anonymous2016-05-01 18:45:00No. 4004
it's not bad , it's just against the KISS philosophy
in *unix , programs should do only one thing and do it well.
a good example of the previous statement is how people often make backups by chaining and piping multiple commands together : tar + bz2/xz + ssh
systemd is not following the same guideline, it has replaced the init process (the first process executed after the bootloader fully loads the kernel) and it keeps growing each day replacing and merging many processes into one, this can cause problems bc when it crashes you have a higher chance of getting a kernel panic and having to force restart losing data.
for a regular linux user this is nothing to be concerned about ,systemd really works and the OS distribution surely tested it before packaging it.
Anonymous2016-05-03 05:02:00No. 4007
Anonymous2016-05-03 05:22:00No. 4008
does systemd do anything new, useful, and easier than already existing FOSS software?
systemd was adopted because it wasn't as buggy and didn't have as many problems as the alternatives.
These days the problem is that systemd is taking over; function creep galore. The systemd/linux joke is becoming more accurate by the day. Also they aren't as good as they once were, letting major bugs go unfixed for too long (even device-breaking) and responding to critics by saying their critics just hate women.