SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The good people over at Infoworld have published a story outlining why they feel systemd is a disaster.
Excerpt from Infoworld:
While systemd has succeeded in its original goals, it's not stopping there. systemd is becoming the Svchost of Linux—which I don't think most Linux folks want. You see, systemd is growing, like wildfire, well outside the bounds of enhancing the Linux boot experience. systemd wants to control most, if not all, of the fundamental functional aspects of a Linux system—from authentication to mounting shares to network configuration to syslog to cron. It wants to do so as essentially a monolithic entity that obscures what's happening behind the scenes.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
systemd: Harbinger of the Linux Apocalypse.
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 98 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Grelb's Reminder:
Eighty percent of all people consider themselves to be above
average drivers.
(Score: 2) by Magic Oddball on Wednesday August 20 2014, @06:38AM
I'm not talented/trained in any STEM discipline, began using Linux full-time in Spring 2008, and I call bullshit on your post.
The only place I noticed users being rude to newcomers asking for help was the Debian discussion area. *How* the other forums were helpful varied (some gave answers outright, some led the newbie to figure out the solution, some suggested where/what they should look for likely answers) but they were friendly about it. In fact, many remained calm & still tried to be helpful even when the newbie was being an asshat.
Systemd & stuff like GRUB2 makes things a thousand times WORSE for regular users like me, let alone the newbies. With the old setup, when stuff broke (almost always because I was experimenting, to be clear) I would search the web and eventually find some simple command or text file I could edit to fix things. It was as newbie-friendly as an OS could get.
With systemd, things are breaking for reasons I can't fathom, and web searches reveal such oh-so-helpful hints as "in the past, we fixed this by changing permissions, but that was before systemd." It's like going back to 2001: "your modem won't work, because Linux does not like winmodems." So far, all I can do is keep updating my system and hope something will magically "fix" it for me. It's like trying to fix my mother's Windows machine when things just as mysteriously stop working on it.
I feel like the programmers behind this mess are taking the same paternalistic attitude towards everyone that many guys had towards women 100 years ago: “oh, don't worry your little head about it, *we'll* handle this for you.” Same obnoxious attitude when it comes to system GUI changes, whether it's Unity, GNOME 3, Firefox Australis, or other things: “now, now, I know you think you'll hate it, but that's really just your fear of change speaking.” Talk about arrogant!
It's also a complete load of crap to claim that this is for the users or for Linux's popularity. That would require them to actually ask in the first place -- and in many cases, not only did they not ask or consult any studies, one team openly told users to STFU when users became too vocal to ignore. Go read the developers' discussions on any of the various projects I've named. You'll see that they're doing it because new projects are fun & exciting (merely fixing bugs is boring hard work), they're enthralled by newness in general, and because they believe they're superior to past devs on the team.
Distros are leaping to systemd purely because it's new -- the same stupid reason that they jumped the gun in embracing KDE 4 and GNOME 3 long before they were ready for daily use.