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This discussion has been archived.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.
If the thunder don't get you, then the lightning will.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 20 2014, @06:50AM
I agree with most of your post, but I'd like to point out that I feel Wayland is exactly what must be done. I used to think the same way as you because "hey, everyone on the Internet opposes it, so it must be crap" but then I read this http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=x_wayland_situation&num=1 [phoronix.com] and saw that presentation:
https://youtu.be/cQoQE_HDG8g [youtu.be]
TL;DR: most Wayland developers and supporters have been the X11/X.Org developers for many years and they know exactly what they're doing. See Wayland as what X12 should have been but never will.
It's a bit like OpenBSD guys rewriting OpenSSL into LibreSSL: they know what they're doing and they're doing it well.
The guys writing systemd seem to be doing just what Red Hat wants, not caring about consequences or crappy design.
(Score: 1) by Rich on Wednesday August 20 2014, @02:25PM
Bit of a late reply... I didn't elaborate on Wayland because I didn't want to stray too far off topic. I'm entirely with you here. I occasionally jest that X11 should be replaced with TCP/IP. The latter is much leaner yet provides roughly the same support for modern desktops. Wayland going for the WindowServer model (layered client bitmaps) is probably the universally most reasonable choice. Though if I had to architect a desktop myself, I'd go for the Be model with a policy bound application server and CarbonEvents-like network transparency at that layer, for a maximum of "teh snappy".
I think the most important "feature" of the new graphics stack is that drivers are separated from the window server. A window server is a high school project compared to getting accelerated GL on a modern GPU. With separate drivers, alternative approaches get a chance.