Reply to post: Re: Bah!

You love Systemd – you just don't know it yet, wink Red Hat bods

jake Silver badge

Re: Bah!

Nice rant. Kinda.

However, I don't recall any major agreement that init needed fixing. Between BSD and SysV inits, probably 99.999% of all use cases were covered. In the 1 in 100,000 use case, a little bit of C (stand alone code, or patching init itself) covered the special case. In the case of Slackware's SysV/BSD amalgam, I suspect it was more like one in ten million.

So in all reality, systemd is an answer to a problem that nobody had. There was no reason for it in the first place. There still isn't a reason for it ... especially not in the 999,999 places out of 1,000,000 where it is being used. Throw in the fact that it's sticking its tentacles[0] into places where nobody in their right mind would expect an init as a dependency (disk partitioning software? WTF??), can you understand why us "old guard" might question the sanity of people singing it's praises?

[0] My spall chucker insists that the word should be "testicles". Tempting ...

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon