The Tragedy of systemd

I think that the section on change at is great. The first 1500 seconds are about systemd any why it is and what it's trying to do, but that doesn't really get to the core of why I complain about it. this video Systemd is change. Massive change that's being forced on us by a twat. Unlike Linux, which was a kernel delivered by a twat but was take-it or leave-it, this is being forced on us. It's untrustworthy and threatening and unknown. In some cases it's an attack on our identity -- "the way you did it in the past is rubbish, do it this way". Clearly we are going to be defensive about it. This isn't unique to people who've used linux for the last 3 decades. Douglas Adams knew this 20 years ago: 1) everything that’s already in the world when you’re born is just normal; 2) anything that gets invented between then and before you turn thirty is incredibly exciting and creative and with any luck you can make a career out of it; 3) anything that gets invented after you’re thirty is against the natural order of things and the beginning of the end of civilization as we know it until it’s been around for about ten years when it gradually turns out to be alright really.” His original article (in a newspaper - remember them?) is at link He mentions John Humphrys and his sneering view of this new fangled internet. Humphrys was (and still is) the bbc radio 4 breakfast presenter. At the same time Terry Wogan was the radio 2 breakfast presenter, a similar age (about 60 at the time). His attit

> SystemD definitely spurred some controversies years ago but is it that bad in 2019? The reasons for the controversies have not really changed (lennart, the idea that it's not "unixy", a takeover of many subsystems by various systemd components, …) so people who didn't like systemd years ago probably still don't. As somebody who's not really involved, I found Benno Rice's The Tragedy of Systemd[0] interesting and enlightening. [0] this video

I recommend watching this to give you some perspective on the SystemD hate: this video I too was furious about the existence of systemd, but now I realize that was mostly because I don't want new things and consider many new things to be bad because they are new and there have been a few 'bad apples' in my personal experience

"Linux has systemd" and that's why the author didn't select it supposedly. I hear this line of thought from people that use FreeBSD often, although I suspect if you ask many of those people why systemd is so horrible you won't actually hear a legitimate (and still relevant) reason from them. I suggest anyone that thinks systemd is terrible and doesn't spend lots of time in Linux to watch this presentation by Benno Rice. this video

Wouldn’t have to be systemd, macOS has launchd for init, FreeBSD could come up with its own thing. This is a good talk I saw recently (by a FreeBSD contributor) on why these sorts of systems have become more common, and why they seem so sweeping in scope. this video (In fact systemd and launchd are so tailored to their respective operating systems that FreeBSD likely would have to do their own init replacement if they cared to.)

You have probably already seen this, but I found this an interesting explanation to the why question: this video

There was a great talk by a FreeBSD developer about systemd, and specifically the (in his eyes, somewhat unwarranted) hatred it has attracted and why this video

For those looking to understand some of the history of the anti-systemd feelings, I found this presentation useful: The Tragedy of systemd ( this video )

I never had any horse in systemd/init.d and wasn't too familiar with the issue until I watched this presentation. systemd seems reasonable enough after considering it. this video

I always appreciated this presentation for being a reasonable and balanced take, if you're interested in other examples: this video

If you haven’t seen this talk[0], I think it covers in a fair shake the positives, negatives, and what even a post-systemd world would have to deal with. [0]: this video