this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
765 points (95.5% liked)

linuxmemes

20894 readers
418 users here now

I use Arch btw

Sister communities:

Community rules

  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
poopsmith
zephyr
rtxn
765
Average systemd debate (lemmy.world)
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by renzev to c/linuxmemes
132 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)

Bullshit, there's always reasons listed. Some more, some less opiniated, but there's always lists.

For me personally:

  • no portability
  • not-invented-here syndrome
    • manages stuff it shouldn't, like DNS
    • makes some configurations unneccessarily complicated
  • more CVE than all other init together
    • service manager that runs with PID 0
[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (3 children)

To the feature creep: that's kind of the point. Why have a million little configs, when I could have one big one? Don't answer that, it's rhetorical. I get that there are use cases, but the average user doesn't like having to tweak every component of the OS separately before getting to doom-scrolling.

And that feature creep and large-scale adoption inevitably has led to a wider attack surface with more targets, so ofc there will be more CVEs, which—by the way—is a terrible metric of relative security.

You know what has 0 CVEs? DVWA.

You know what has more CVEs and a higher level of privilege than systemd? The linux kernel.

And don'tme get started on how bughunters can abuse CVEs for a quick buck. Seriously: these people's job is seeing how they can abuse systems to get unintended outcomes that benefit them, why would we expect CVEs to be special?

TL;DR: That point is akin to Trump's argument that COVID testing was bad because it led to more active cases (implied: being discovered).

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Sure, some like overengineering.

[–] TheKingBee 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

is it overengineering or just a push back against "make each program do one thing well," and saying yeah but I have n things to do and I only need them done, well or not I just need them done and don't want to dig through 20 files to do it...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I'd argue s6 does that aspect better, and without overengineering and userspace-dependents. Systemd was just the earlier bird.

load more comments (2 replies)