just a little sarcasm for ya, but yea...I hope you fair better than me with it. I'm just learning to accept that at least for now, I don't have complete control over my system.

Just to correct this, the only developer that was banned from kernel developing is Kay Sievers, all other systemd developers are still allowed to commit patches. Kay Sievers was banned for his attitude when it comes to bug-fixing and will be allowed again if that attitude changes. If that happened already I can't say, I didn't hear of any follow-ups of that incident.

2 members found this post helpful.

Thanks for the correction Tobi.

I used Arch for just a little while, before systemd, and I had the impression that the init system was easier than sysv. But systemd at a glance also seems somewhat simpler to configure than sysv, the "config files", with some hopefully simpler syntax for dependencies and such things, instead of humongous scripts and having the update-scripts as auxiliaries to add or remove other scripts. I think I could never get to add a script to the system in the 100% correct manner (which is totally a big deal of my fault as I've never read much/enough, anyway).

It seems systemd is more like the xdg-autostart ".desktop" files in this regard. Which I also don't totally like anyway, but it's easier than several complex scripts interacting.


Other than that I don't really know/care much, and I think there will be easier to do stuff like scheduling some processes to start (and finish) before shutdown, rather than at arbitrary times with cron.

On the negative side, there has been a few times that my PC would only "halt", even though I used the correct "poweroff" command. That's really annoying and doesn't inspire much confidence.

I think most people are against systemd because they feel it requires unnecessary dependencies, and because it's from the same maintainer(s) as pulse-audio, which I heard was buggy.

1 members found this post helpful.

I have tested systemd on Gentoo now for some time and besides some minor (and totally distro related) points I am quite happy with it. Works without any problems, documentation is great (all manpages I have looked at so far come with examples, setting up network bridges for my LXC containers was done in 5 minutes, following the manpages). Boot times on my laptop are about 25% faster, on my workstation with some servers running and autostarting some LXC containers at boot there is no difference to OpenRC (parallel mode).

I will test it few weeks more, if no complications come up I might be tempted to switch.

P.S.: I also use Pulseaudio, never had problems with that either. I think the "buggy" image comes from the time when Ubuntu decided to go with an unfinished version of it, just like KDE 4 had the image of being buggy in the beginning due to the same cause.

3 members found this post helpful.

I'll admit there is some things about systemd that make things a little easier. As time goes on, many of the bugs that people are irritated by are getting squashed. For me, it's just a little irritating that there are (as you said) un-necessary dependencies. Not only that, but services that I have no use for that cannot be permanently disabled. I'm not a huge Gnome 3 fan, but as far as I know, it is Systemd dependent on all distros (unless you want to run it in a "fall-back" mode). I've had some trouble with power management, there are settings hidden somewhere relevant to either udev, upower, dbus, or perhaps all that will put your laptop to sleep at a certain battery percent, regardless of what you have your power-manager set at (XFCE-Power-Manager). All of the dbus config files are written in a confusing XML format. On the bright side, I do like the simplicity of a single command to enable or disable services, I like using it to manage my wireless connections without having any third-party service running (like Network Manager). I do occasionally have the same problem with the system only appearing to "halt" instead of shutting down. This problem is more common than you may think. If you notice, when this happens, it's usually preceded by your system using more than a normal amount of CPU during run-time, then when you run the shutdown command, it gets hung up. This is because Systemd is stiffed by a process it cannot stop (perhaps because it was never running to begin with). It doesn't happen all of the time, but enough for people to notice.

1 members found this post helpful.

So it is a personality thing based on heresay. Oneday these discussions will be based on technical fact.

When Ubuntu released PulseAudio it was really crappy and Lennart (I think) complained that they released a really crappy version instead of the finished product. I use PulseAudio and apart from that 1 Ubuntu release it has been pretty good.

so quick question: why use PulseAudio when Alsa works fine by it's self? Is there a special need for it? Alsa runs my 5.1 through the HDMI and everything.

+1
Although an argument could be made for users having choice. Some people seem to like PulseAudio. I say, provide it as an option for those who want it, but do not replace something that works. Of course, ALSA, sysvinit and Xorg must be replaced, because they are old. They still work perfectly fine, but they are old. If they are not replaced, there will be no progress.

1 members found this post helpful.

I have quoted both posts as the 1st requires an answer and both require correction.

Ok quite simply Alsa does not work OOTB with some of my machines but Pulse works with all of them. I want something that I don't have to fart-ass around for ages with to get it to work. In my case Pulse works while Alsa doesn't work without fiddling. The discussion about choice means nothing to me with regards to this, infact I have no choice because I want something that works and works right away.

I feel like being a jerk today, so I am going to nit-pick. No need for "correction".
This is still a choice. If you needed something that works "out-of-the-box," because you did not know how to configure it, then you would not have a choice. Knowing how to configure, but not wanting to is not a need. Assuming you know how to do it, you choose the option that does not require tinkering on your boxes. There is nothing wrong with that choice, but it is still a choice. I am being technical, but I am bored enough at the moment to do it.

Your assumption is wrong, enough said really.

Ah. Then I was wrong.

Now plug in your gaming headset and reroute the audio from a game to the headset while keeping output of your simultaneously running music player to the your audio amplifier, monitor or whatever you use to play back audio.

Seriously, which one you use comes down to the features you need from an audio subsystem. If you are OK with the features provided by Alsa there is nothing wrong with just using plain Alsa, as is nothing wrong with using Pulseaudio when it fits better to your needs.
1. Pulseaudio will never replace Alsa, it works on top of it. That is like thinking XFCE will replace plain Xorg.
2. If sysvinit will be replaced in your distro of choice is up to the developers. They will determine if they want to replace sysvinit, and with what to replace it, based on the distributions needs, not on how old sysvinit is.
3. If you really think that Xorg works totally fine and is replaced by its developers with Wayland just because of progress I have to assume that you haven't actually researched that topic. You possibly should do that before commenting on a topic.