alt Hacker NewsNo, systemd is not the bane of Linux. What existed before it was much worse. Upstart was a totally broken mess and almost all sysv init scripts contained several bugs.
I don't like systemd but it is a lesser evil.
No, systemd is not the bane of Linux. What existed before it was much worse. Upstart was a totally broken mess and almost all sysv init scripts contained several bugs.
I don't like systemd but it is a lesser evil.
systemd is not an init system; it _contains_ an init system. It is a huge swatch of the whole userspace of a Linux system up to shell or GUI sessions - and having an init system was just an excuse; and in fact, the systemd point brought up in the linked article is unrelated to init systems.
There are quite a few init systems: The venerable sysvinit, runit, s6, openrc and others. You don't like upstart? Ok, choose another one, there are many. Here is a comparison table by the Gentoo folks:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems
As for the claim of "almost all sysvinit scripts contained several bugs" - that's both hyperbole and false. Plus, you seem to be implying that systemd has not been troubled by bugs, which of course it has (and that does not disqualify it; the fundamental design and organizational nature as a project are the disqualifiers).