- Joined
- Jan 28, 2018
The problem I'd have with systemd in actual usage ignoring absolutely everything else is the bugs/design decisions you cannot avoid (and a project of that scope *will* have) by switching a part of it out for something else. So you have to fall in line, just like with Windows. Also would really be uncomfortable with the rate at which things seem to change, which I would not be comfortable with for any important system part. Quite a few programs that run my system haven't really changed in decades and that's actually how I like it. (No, that doesn't mean I'm not open to new stuff, I constantly try new things. Lately I tried the fish shell and the elvish shell, for example) Yet somehow these people claim systemd is rock-solid and my solution is a mess that "needs constant tinkering". I literally just cp/rsync system files to a new system, boot it and it runs. How much simpler can it get? They've also seem to be fallen into that trap where the "user" cannot be "trusted" to do certain things without services and handholding. That's a terrible approach for this kind of software.
Also it's funny that he got the idea from MacOS. I didn't know MacOS did this. You know why? Because I actually use Linux, contrary to many of these people.
Also it's funny that he got the idea from MacOS. I didn't know MacOS did this. You know why? Because I actually use Linux, contrary to many of these people.