Out of all the Linux init systems out there, which one are you actually daily driving right now and why? ​Have you tried any others before your current one? What made you stick with it over the rest?

  • hello_hello [hy/hym]@hexbear.netM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    25 days ago

    I recommend reading Poettering’s myth-debunking post on common systemd criticisms (https://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html). Some of these are even outdated (like the dbus one where current systemd development is focused around building a alternative varlink interface for IPC in addition to dbus).

    Most other init systems can achieve service paralleization and other goodies that systemd-init provides but that isn’t the whole point of systemd.

    The tagline for systemd is “systemd is a suite of basic building blocks for a Linux system. It provides a system and service manager that runs as PID 1 and starts the rest of the system.” So it’s clearly not concerned with just being an init system and hasn’t been for a long time.

      • hello_hello [hy/hym]@hexbear.netM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        23 days ago

        But these components aren’t strictly part of systemd-init. networkd, systemd-boot, resolved, etc are all optional blocks. Its possible to use systemd-init and not buy into other features.

        Software does not depend on systemd they depend on features systemd provides (ex: GNOME and KDE simplifying their login/startup sequence by leveraging systemd-userdb)