alt Hacker NewsNot the OP, but to provide a short perspective:
- Too many parts.
- Doing too many things, sometimes poorly.
- Fights with other services, no graceful fallback & logging (i.e. aggressive).
- As a result, unnecessarily complex, brittle and fragile.
- Harder to secure (at code level) than simpler tools.
- Project is too aggressive and want to replace any and every service.
- Sometimes break in unexpected ways.
- Not faster than Parallel Sys-V.
Replies
origini • today at 10:38 AM
I'm using systemd for ages, never had a single issue at all with it.
But do you run systemd and complain or why do you even hate it?
its linux right, if a linux distribution decides to use it, its not systemds fault to be used and if you use it and don't take the time and effort to have it your way, you shouldn't complain either?
➕ show 2 replies
torcete • today at 10:38 AM
I reckon using cron vs systemd timers is a good example of some of the points above.
➕ show 1 reply
preisschild • today at 10:16 AM
It has the exact right amount of parts. A modern Operating system just has a lot more to cover than 1970's Unix...
I can remember having to deal with SysVinit and thank god for Poettering and all the other systemd maintainers for bringing the Linux ecosystem to the 21st century
➕ show 3 replies
+ Harder to debug/trace than initscripts.