I'd say how you will assess systemd depends largely on 2 factors: 1) whether you've become more or less accustomed to the workings of sysvinit; and 2) how technically informed you are as to your computer's workings--especially its initiation sequence. Being a decidedly ill-informed computer user on the technical level, and one who "cut his teeth" on sysvinit (to the extent I needed to have anyhting to do with the initiation sequence), I find systemd to be an annoyance. sysvinit never failed to perform any of the relatively simplistic tasks I wanted it to, so I see no net gain whatever in using systemd, finding only inconvenience in needing to relearn how to do things I already had the ability to do. But again, my needs in connection with an init system are quite simplistic.

If I were new to GNU/Linux and were more or less learning anew on a system with systemd installed, I doubt I would have any criticisms of it at all. The only evil Linux distros are those that come with rootkits pre-installed.

Devuan in its dng mailing list is all about twaddle and hype. If you'll take a look at it you'll see that 99.9% of topics aren't directly related to Devuan development, a book club if you want. They have another one though with tumbleweed rolling back and forth in there. I used to be engaged in the "book club", until it became really boring and just plain insults started coming from both the members of the "club" and some trolls. I became a troll myself. Luckily, I amn't one anymore.

I even tried to help, but they said they didn't need it. It's pretty much around five people doing (or not doing) the job. As I stated countless amount of times, the job they need (remove systemd and libsystemd0 dependency) could've been done in some one-two months. Yet they still aren't ready. And I'm not sure they will ever be. And that's poor in my opinion, because the initial idea was nice and supported by many of the community.

cynwulf above indeed deserved their reputation points by the statement. Looking at their mailing list and ye can see how much credibility they lack, especially after all these flame wars, there were just too many of them. And they meant nothing, to Devuan, to systemd, to the crowd overall. Those who liked systemd continued liking it, those who didn't, didn't change their opinions either.

Sorry about this slightly OT rant but I saw your signature and your post and decided to post my opinion.

When I am ready to test or use another linux distro, I don't ponder if it is using sysvinit/init, upstart, or systemd. That's irrelevant to me.

All that matters to me is that all my hardware works. That's the most important part.

I <3 linux.

No offense taken.

My evaluation of Devuan was based solely on using it. I'm not proselytizing for it; at best, I think it deserves a fair test.

I have no experience with or opinion regarding those who manage the project. My experience with working with organizations, though, persuades me that projects of persons who eschew assistance offered in a spirit of good will generally do not come to bountiful fruition.

Frankly, I don't think the majority of users will either like or dislike SystemD. For most users, the boot process is transparent to the user. Users will like or dislike their distro. If that distro happens to use SystemD, and boots in an acceptable manner, they will be satisfied.

I've helped someone setup something on a server using Debian Jessie. It worked fine, it runs fine. I agree with the sentiment I've seen on the internet that systemd should stick to init. Its the stated goal of removing the pointless differences between linux distributions and positioning itself as the must have technology in userspace with its scope creep which seems to be the real issue. Straight from the horses mouth: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html

Its not really what it is but what it will become. The end result (several years from now) could be amazing with the detractors being mistaken, or it could a heavily integrated system that needs to be replaced itself. I'd rather have a competition of inits. I've seen stuff about pulse audio but it works fine for me. I never tried it until this year. Competition is good. Systemd developers seem to be anti-competition forcing other people like Gentoo to fork software like udev. I read that people don't like upstart. I've never used it. Around 15 years ago I thought KDE applications were ugly/cheap looking, and they'd freeze on me regardless what distribution I tried out. Now I love KDE and its software. Upstart might have become the best init system ever. One of the other ones might end up being the best init system ever. Another one might come up learning from all the others. I don't know. If that happens how will it play out when everything is integrated into systemd? How easy would it be to replace systemd with something else after it completely integrates itself into everything that is important and dear? It might be used a thousand years from now for intergalatic travel. Historians could talk of its genius design. I don't know.

Systemd is a fine piece of software (if it wasn't people wouldn't be using it) but it might not be for everyone and all tasks (if it were then what are these people complaining about?). The configuration scripts look very clean. Its the philosophy behind it that is the issue. Do linux users want an integrated and samey userspace? Do they want everything to be placed and done the same way on every system they use and not have to learn the idiosyncratic personality traits of individuals linux distributions? I like bsd-init and I don't want to be cut off from software because of the init system I prefer. I don't understand why it has to be this way.

I raised this issue among certain fans in the past and got the distinct impression that most had no clue that there were still systemd remnants in the derivative distribution they believed had been "disinfected".

There are a few different types of 'systemd opposition' (I won't say 'critique'), but Devuan is pretty much fueled by the kind of opposition which relies on a very vocal anti-systemd fan base and less in the way of fact or substance. Like anything where the focus is on spreading FUD and attacking the opposition, there will be little getting done in the away of achieving the stated goals. By contrast, antiX (a Debian derivative) managed to put out a 'systemd-less' release just over a year ago.

From my perspective, if you don't like it, you use and support something which has never adopted it and has (for the time being) no intention of taking that route.

I can see why they decided to develop Devuan. There was a *huge* debate in the Debian community at the time. If you're someone immersed in a distro who doesn't agree with a fundamental decision it takes to move in a certain decision, it's natural that you would think about forking it to try and shape it the way you want. The folk in question loved Debian but hated systemd, and the vote was fairly close. Did you honestly expect the disgruntled developers to just give up on Debian and start developing for antiX?

And I say this as someone who is going to migrate to a systemd-based distro shortly with no great qualms. I doubt that I am ever going to use Devuan but kudos to the developers for trying to give us a choice and sticking with it.

init running, yes; BSDs too &c... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Init
https://www.textplain.net/blog/2015/...like-bsd-init/
perceptively is a python evil for eating a rabbit?
[screencast]cCI18qAoKq4[/screencast]
Run if you want...

you got the wrong video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4

this is the right video

I think that modularity here is an anti-feature. It's a boon to RH that systemd is front and center to anything that wants to talk to it.

No, systemd is not evil, and Donald Trump is a perfectly rational human being.

No, but what actually happened is that the "disgruntled developers" either stuck with Debian or went and did other things... They certainly didn't fork Debian or join the Devuan project.

And this is probably because, for the most part, they have more sense (and a better grip on reality) than to try to fork a whole distribution - especially one on the massive scale of Debian - which by it's very nature requires many thousands of volunteer package maintainers and developers in order to survive. Devuan don't have that - they have a kind of an objective, that's about it.

antiX have put out a systemd-less release. In the same time, Devuan have talked about doing that on a mailing list.

None of the key Debian people who opposed systemd so vehemently are actually working on the Devuan project.

The Devuan project is actually led by a group of self proclaimed "Veteran UNIX Admins" ("The VUAs"). It's an effort led by users, not ex Debian developers. It's called a 'fork', technically it's not a fork - it may seek to become one, but it has a long way to go. If it's a 'fork', there are a hell of a lot more Debian 'forks' out there...

Fair enough, although Roger Leigh would be disappointed to see that you don't consider him a key Debian person. At the fork announcement, Devuan also mentioned that they had the endorsement of two other anonymous Debian developers (although why they chose to remain anonymous is anyone's guess).

https://beta.devuan.org/os/debian-fork/

As Julie Newmar might have said, That does not compute. Like it or not, SystemD is rational.

You are comparing apples with toadstools.

I am sure that many people might disagree with some of my sarcastic comment. You are free to believe in either systemd or Donald Trump as you wish. My opinion is that anyone who believes in either of those statements is someone that feels they should be dictating what other people believe. Such is the nature of sarcasm and no, it is not a non sequitur.