Hacker News Reader

Comment by IshKebab | Hacker News Reader

Yeah Wayland I get. It's still kind of janky even after almost 20 years. Complaining about Systemd makes no sense though. It works very reliably, switching to it caused no issues, and it has fixed a number of problems with the Linux desktop.

Some people just want to live in the 80s forever.

View on HN

> It works very reliably, [...], and it has fixed a number of problems with the Linux desktop.

Yep. Today, I would tend to agree with this.

> switching to it caused no issues

Yeah, okay, there's no need to make wild untrue claims to support your position. The initial adoption was rough, things absolutely did break, and some of those rough edges are still around to bite the unwary (enable-linger/KillUserProcesses are my "favorite" footgun that will never be fixed because systemd thinks killing your stuff is a feature).

"Some people just want to live in the 80s forever."

I think this shaming of free software users that want to make other choices is rather terrible.

Most of systemd's critics are not people that just want to use another init system. They object to it on stupid philosophical grounds for which they should be shamed.

Most of systemd's proponents are not people that care about what service management system they use. They defend systemd despite their ignorance of both systemd and the proposed alternatives solely to feel part of the "in group" of people who moan about people who moan about systemd.

People who defend systemd do so because they want their system to work reliably and quickly. It does that. Before you say "so does sysvinit", no it does not. It was janky-but-workable on servers and desktops in the 90s, that basically never did anything except startup and shutdown. Most modern computers aren't like that.

More straw man arguments. You have just confirmed that you have _no idea_ what alternatives exist, that you have _no idea_ what systemd actually does, and you have _no idea_ what my actual stance is in this discussion.

Please don't insult me by insinuating that I think that sysvinit is anything other than a weird esoteric init program which has, in the past and on linux distros, been the supporting piece of a garbage heap of poorly written shell scripts (and which is currently on BSDs the supporting piece of a relatively okay designed heap of shell scripts which implement a silly service management model that I also don't like).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com