I use plasma, BTW

  • uranibaba@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    The only arguments against I have seen so for is systemd does a lot more than just handing system startup (systemd-resolved is one such example) and files that was previously stored as text now require systemd’s own tool to read (journalctl?).

    So not the actual startup function, just everything else.

    • Dave.
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Mmm I have a general dislike of systemd because it doesn’t adhere to the “do one thing and do it well” approach of traditional Unix systems.

      It’s a big old opaque blob of software components that work nicely together but don’t play well with others, basically.

      Edit: but it solved a particular set of problems in serverspace and it’s bled over to the consumer Linux side of things and generally I’m ok with it if it simplifies things for people. I just don’t want a monoculture to spring up and take root across all of Linux as monocultures aren’t great for innovation or security.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Based on the video someone posted, it’s not very portable either.

      I feel that little part of my brain that wants to add yet another standard itching. Easily starting something at boot is good, but I don’t see why that has to come with loss of modularity.

      • jbk@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Afaik they don’t care about being portable to instead focus as much as possible on being fast and whatever