• lazynooblet@lazysoci.al
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    I remember when systemd was a replacement for sysvinit and it was a slight delay to relearn but overall an improvement.

    Then they started adding services, and that’s where I started to not get along with it.

    ntpd, resolver, networking, replacing ssh startup with a triggered socket. These got on my nerves and felt like it was overstepping.

    • edinbruh@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Well, most of those aren’t really part of the “systemd init system”, they are just part of the “systemd project” which is more than just the init system.

      As such they are just optional services that you can install (except the ssh part which is still the same ssh but with a different default configuration), but the init system of systemd is still the same. They are just more convenient and/or advanced for distro maintainers.

      As a matter of fact, most desktop distributions don’t even use “systemd-networkd” which is the networking manager of systemd. Instead they use “networkmanager”, which many people associate with systemd, but it’s really an entirely different project.

      You are still free to use the systemd init system in place of sysvinit, and not use all those services you dislike, you just have to configure them. Which most people think is inconvenient, but shouldn’t be a problem for you seeing as you don’t like the convenience of the systemd ecosystem.

    • The_Decryptor@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      replacing ssh startup with a triggered socket

      Socket activation itself isn’t exactly new, inetd got added to BSD in 1986.