linuxmemes

Contrarianism

When you want to feel special but not enough to go to the effort of using FreeBSD

because the over 70 different binaries of systemd are "not modular" because they are designed to work together. What makes a monolith is, apparently, the name of the overarching project, not it being a single binary (which again, it's not)

When you're not using your computer

If you have to ask, then there's no reason not to. It's people who tinker with their systems that encounter issues with it, or more often random annoyances that add up over tme to those memes.

any advice for trying void? Ive heard good things but never really gave it a chance.

Tribalism exists in every circle, perhaps moreso in tech circles. Ironically anyone who hates on a distro could just switch, or build their own distro if they were so inclined, but it's often the hating that people participate more in than using their system. Use what works for you, and if it no longer works for you use something else.

If you are just a user, in that a computer is just a tool you use, then you're right, there's comparatively little reason to be concerened or even know about the underlying details of the system. If you go further and start making changes to your system, or even building more complex systems, over time you will find yourself forming quite firm opinions about various parts of the underlying system, especially if you've had experience with other options.

Yeah, on a desktop I don't really mind whatever*. On a server however, I think systemd is great and I wouldn't want to miss it anymore.

* except Debian's frankenstein systemd + sysvinit combination. Burn it

This feels like an "I would switch to Linux if I didn't need Windows for work" comment from another universe.

Maybe a stupid question, but is the thing you did fundamentally different from Devuan?

I have a moral objection: backslash () usage in file paths.

All I hear about it is that it doesn't follow the Unix philosophy of a program should do one thing and do it well. And while it does seem quite large and do a lot of things, out of all the times I have broken my system, systemd has never been to blame.

Edit: deleted duplicate comment.

Some people think it handles too many low-level systems. It's a valid concern because if systemd itself were to become compromised (like Xz Utils was) or a serious bug was introduced, all of the userland processes would be affected. People who are stuck in the 90s and think that the Unix philosophy is still relevant will also point out that it's a needlessly complex software suite and we should all go back to writing initscripts in bash.

Red Hat, the owner of systemd, has also had its fair share of controversies. It's a company that many distrust.

Ultimately, those whose opinion mattered the most decided that systemd's benefits outweigh the risks and drawbacks. Debian held a vote to determine the project's future regarding init systems. Arch Linux replaced initscripts because systemd was simply better, and replicating and maintaining its features (like starting services once their dependencies are running) with initscripts would've been unjustifiably complicated.