I know I’m not the only one that said this but I really can’t stand how systemd is becoming “the norm” init system for every major distro, this is bad.
it is especially bad when certain apps are built specifically for systemd, locking users behind a specific init system and compatibility issues spark because you don’t use a mainstream one , this doesn’t go with the idea of Linux, which is having “freedom” with your os, picking and choosing what goes on and off while still being usable.
I switched to artix Linux with openRC a while ago the moment systemd added code for potential age verification, they called it malicious compliance but I really didn’t like the smell of that, now I’m fighting tooth and nail with some applications because they’re systemd dependent, resulting in me creating custom scripts to mitigate their issues.
This shit again?
this doesn’t go with the idea of Linux, which is having “freedom” with your os, picking and choosing what goes on and off while still being usable.
No. That’s not the “idea of Linux”. That’s your idea of Linux. I don’t see people bitching about the heavy reliance on the GNU toolchain.
But people centainly will with the reliance on uutils. And it’ll be too late. How people on Lemmy of all places dont get it?
On systemd, I don’t like it and use another init.
You’re right that the GNU toolchain is massive, but the distinction lies in "modularity versus integration". GNU tools are a collection of separate programs that happen to work together, you can swap bash for zsh or ls for busybox without breaking the whole system. systemd, however, is a tightly coupled suite where the init, logging, networking, and DNS are interdependent.
The idea of Linux isn’t just about running big software, it’s about the ability to compose a system from independent parts.
When a single project dictates the entire stack and makes it nearly impossible to replace just one component without rewriting half the OS, that crosses the line from toolchain to platform lock-in, which is a fundamentally different threat to user freedom than a collection of large but separable GNU utilities.
you can swap bash for zsh or ls for busybox without breaking the whole system
Is that so?
rm -f /bin/bashand reboot. I’ll wait… Go ahead. You’ll be amazed at how many thing rely on bash. Or indeed sh which is why bash runs in bourne compatible mode when executed as /bin/sh.The idea of Linux isn’t just about running big software, it’s about the ability to compose a system from independent parts.
This has never been true. The Linux kernel team themselves reject this silliness with a monolithic kernel that required a very specific toolchain to even build and run. Linux has always had tight integration.
We’ve had many competing implementations of some things (desktop environments come to mind) but that is not the same as “build a system out of Lego components” as a design goal. It’s what you get when you have no direction. It would be a very stupid design goal.
this doesn’t go with the idea of Linux, which is having “freedom” with your os
Err… it’s “freedom” as in “you are free to run your own system using whatever software you wish” not “freedom” as in “distros and devs have a duty to support your freedom to run any specific software you happen to like”.
Let’s turn down the entitlement dial a bit.
didn’t say that distros have to bend for my will in regards to needing to include options other than systemd, everyone is free to publish whatever they wish and If I don’t like it, I won’t use it, simple as that.
I’m just expressing a concern where over relying on one init system will limit options
The only option limiter to ever exist in Linux is the amount of free time maintainers have and the effort they’re willing to spend.
(This is a convoluted way to tell you that if you want more “anything” independence you should contribute)
man i love contributing to open source projects so much, its my way of saying thank you to the developers if I don’t plan on supporting them through donations
It’s Open Source. Nobody needs to use it, and it’s especially not all-inclusive. That being said, it’s also not new at all as it’s been around in most distros for well over a decade. It has its pros and cons like anything.
Your assumption that “freedom” has something to do with Linux writ large is misguided though. You have distros that have communal decision making, and if they find a benefit to systemd, then they’ll use systemd. Don’t use that distro if you don’t like it. There’s your freedom of choice.
It’s Open Source. Nobody needs to use it
I didn’t mention anything about people needing to use it.
You have distros that have communal decision making, and if they find a benefit to systemd, then they’ll use systemd. Don’t use that distro if you don’t like it. There’s your freedom of choice.
I don’t have an issue with distros using systemd, my issue lies in how major distributions implemented systemd without other options, which created an environment where app developers have to build for the most common init system in mind, you don’t think that’s an issue? having apps only compatible with one init system like how some apps are only compatible with windows, that’s not libre, its still pushing users towards a specific obvious choice
systemd works best, scales well and causes less pain at maintaining
The “less pain” you experience today might come with the cost of being tied to the systemd ecosystem. If a future version introduces a breaking change or a bug that affects the whole stack, there is no easy “switch” to a lighter alternative without rebuilding the system, its closely tied to the Linux kernel and does more than it should.
though I agree with you on being scalable and easy to maintain that’s one of the pros of it being a monolithic suite, everything just works
Thank goodness I’m not a major distro maintainer and don’t have to deal with all that shit. However, the times I did come into contact with it weren’t as bad as with upstart and sysvinit.
Let me stir up your anxiety with this simple question: that if future version of kernel introduces a breaking change or a bug that affects the whole stack?
I don’t know what ur asking tbh, rephrase.
Apply the same worries to the kernel, does your panic holds?
You sound new to the ecosystem at large, and I don’t mean that to be condescending, just that you may not have all the context needed to understand why it exists. Any distro that exists right now can flip back to SysV if they want to. They just don’t want to. It may be more flexible to the neckbeards, but it’s massively more comprehensive in scaling and integrating than a set of Init scripts. It has huge benefits to system integrators, OEMs, and especially the people who manage the largest concentration of Linux deployments: Datacenter Ops teams.
The fact that you, a Desktop user takes issue with that is meaningless to the ecosystem at large. I manage thousands of deployed bare metal machines, and I’d never switch back, because it SysV was fucking painful. Sure it was easier to debug in some cases, but was it as useful or reliable? Not even close.
Just go use something else and stop letting it bother you. You’ll feel better in the long run.
telling me I’m new and I don’t have context isn’t contributing anything to this conversion.
you can start by making a counter argument, someone mentioned GNU tool chain reliance, they did a good job of swaying my opinion.
Why would I care about swaying your opinion? Nobody here responding to you is invested in YOUR opinion on the matter, or cares what you think about it. They are simply correcting your misinformed attitude about some things from what I can see.
If anything they’re concerned you’re running around in the world with misguided opinion, and potentially misinforming others.
That ship has sailed. Systemd isn’t going anywhere. The upside is you can run a distro that uses an alternative init if you want. There’s runit, sysV, and openrc that I can think of off the top of my head.
You dont have to like, or use systemd. That’s the beauty of Linux.
this can’t be true! i was told that there was no controversy over systemd co-option of the inits!!! lol
my only gripe is that it does too much; more than an init system should be doing and i got to experience this first hand when i had to add a bunch of containers to systemd to use them.
Kinda curious what applications give you trouble without systemd? I ran Void linux for like 2 years and now i’m on Guix, and never really had issues with applications because of systemd not being present.
mullvad vpn refuses to run on non-systemd init systems, had to do heavy tweaking to get it to run but ultimately ended up using the “manual” wireshark method.
I don’t have anything against mullvad, I’m a huge fan of their service but that’s one example
Ah, did not know that actually. I think i used the official mullvad cli on NixOS once since they had it packaged anyway, but on other distros i always used wireguard to connect, so that explains why i haven’t encountered that.
Idk. about the Linux idea and the freedom being at risk.
You’ve chosen another init system, they’ve chosen theirs -hopefully- for technical reasons.
As far as I see your choice and freedom is not constrained. You are free to mix and build whatever suits your needs.
Idk. about the Linux idea and the freedom being at risk.
imagine this, you’re a windows user ready to make the jump, you’re looking at different distros and they’re all have a systemd init system.
you finally choose a distro and make the jump, you use ur os for a few months and you feel ready to explore the vast universe of different distros with different flavors, you had a great experience after all.
and then you switch to something like void Linux, technically able people will have no problem switching to this but someone who is used to the convince of systemd just because “it works” might just go back to what they’re comfortable with, this doesn’t encourage exploration and freedom of choice because systemd does everything for you and the apps you love and use might not be compatible with something other than systemd unless you heavily tweak things.
You’ve chosen another init system, they’ve chosen theirs -hopefully- for technical reasons.
Totally agree with you on this, not saying people shouldn’t choose their init system, they’re free to do so.
Again. Even exploration is choice.
Nobody owes you the experience you are mapping out here.
I didn’t say people have to explore, I know its a choice
I feel this but with libadwaita apps. Stick out like a sore thumb, can’t theme them, and many aren’t even GNOME’s own core apps.
There is no worse project in the Linux world than that.
This many times. The devs go out of their way to curb any attemp of customization outside their “guidelines”.
Did not known what Linux had a philosophy or ideology.
I expect there will be a popular systemd fork soon enough it they continue adding bs like that