Soon it'll include a browser and email client. Can't wait!
Systemd is an umbrella under which many key userspace tools are being developed. The actual init system itself is a lot bigger than the old SysV Init system was, but it is separate than all these other things that also say Systemd on them.
The best analogy is GNU. You don't complain that GNU contains a compiler, and also a text editor, and also C System Library do you? GNU is a project that develops a load of components that play well with each other. Systemd is the same.
Just wait until ls has to have hooks into dbus to do its job.
Including busybox in the initrd or whatever it's called now is probably a good idea. Having systemd developers write a new interpretation of that, rehashing old bugs is not great.
which uses LLVM for building Linux and Systemd, replaces all core utils with non GNU versions. It use a non GNU libc and so on...
But that aside people often confuse/mixup the systemd service manager and the systemd project which bundles a wide variety of programs which can be used with systemd.
The reasons for this is because systemd itself confuses this. The change log is not split by sub-projects and the sub-projects have sometimes no clean boundary between them and the systemd service manager.
I think it would be nice if systemd changes in three ways:
1. Have more clean boundaries between the core service manager and it's sub-project.
2. Have a recurring periods where new features are blocked from being merged and development focused on cleaning up (e.g. fixing bugs). (I can recommend that to any projects, very few do so).
3. Get "outside" feedback for certain mainly UX aspects, some parts of systemd are out right counter intuitive unless you are not very familiar with it. A thinks which is very easy to happen to any project, but still could be improved on (and maybe already is improved on).
Oh and there where a very few security WTF are you doing moments, I hope there will be no more such moments in the future as systemd on itself it quite useful for Linux, especially desktop Linux.
The increase in the amount of user-level software that depends on systemd and Wayland is a forcing factor. For example, my understanding is that official distributions of GNOME depend on systemd, and many Linux desktops are being actively developed for Wayland (though I don't think any major desktop environment or toolkit has abandoned X11). I expect this trend to continue, given that systemd is part of the most popular Linux distributions, Wayland will be default in Ubuntu (https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Ubuntu-2...), and GNOME runs on Wayland (with KDE's port to Wayland being actively developed: see https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=KDE-2021...).
So, yes, I do see a split occurring between "modern Linux" (with systemd and Wayland) and "traditional Linux," with the BSDs fitting in closer to the "traditional Linux" camp.
There will be Linux for desktops to run a web browser (aka poorly emulate a chromebook) and for docker and docker only.
If you want a non-containerized server or some kind of non-desktop embedded thingy, or anything that can be computed other than emulating a chromebook and doing containers, you'll have to run FreeBSD or some other OS.
The days of "just install Debian to do anything anywhere" are gone, which is sad, because there's really no technical reason or need for the destruction.
What are you missing from Debian these days that was there 5/10/20 years ago? What has been "destroyed"?
Oomd, oh yea, good idea, but WHY it has to be in systemd? The same applies to about 3/4 of things in there. Because of this i've started to call it LennartOS. And also I don't feel like linux is about freedom anymore but more like some sort of weird power display games.
I use several of these projects because I like the systemd design philosophy (ex the way the CLI interface and config files are) and trust the developers of their software. However, there are popular altenatives available for all of these components, should you choose to use them:
systemd-resolved: bind9, dnsmasq, powerdns
systemd-networkd: NetworkManager, ConnMan
systemd-boot: GRUB2, Refind, EFISTUB
systemd-oomd: earlyoom, nohang, oomd (the facebook one, not systemd)
It's a service manager for your Linux OS which manage all services down to initial startup related services.
Just viewing it as a init system is misleading.
As a side note I think a service manager directly above the kernel is a must have for any modern server or desktop operating system ;=)
Systemd is the name of the init system. Systemd is also the name of the project developing multiple systemd-* services. Maybe they could help the situation a bit by renaming the service itself systemd-init, but we've had enough time for people to learn to deal with a tiny bit of ambiguity...
«It (systemd) provides a system and service manager» (from https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/).
So it manages services and manages the system, as a whole.
> Every time I see all the stuff packed into it I feel extreme urge to switch to freebsd again.
Meh, a lot of people bring this up, but they never switch.
Lennax
Try understanding a bit more than just the name's prefix before getting so bent out of shape.
However, you should probably switch to FreeBSD because you think it’s great too, not because you hate systemd.
https://papers.freebsd.org/2018/bsdcan/rice-the_tragedy_of_s...
Joke's on you.