I use busybox as PID 1 aka init (mll); also for "no /etc/passwd", there's nss-systemd (8th bullet in https://lists.freedesktop.org/archiv...er/037698.html), leaving me undecided/don't_care.

you can simply use init and run busybox

What's the advantage of busybox outside an embedded system or a very lightweight distro like dsl?

you simply do your own distro and do not need to run any Systemd distro

"What's the advantage of busybox"

There may be little, none or some. I guess if one designed a distro, then they'd have to weigh the merits of using busybox.

Little, easy to install.

None. Hard to maintain.

Some, may offer designer ways to keep their work.

??

It is much better to be really FREE.

You compile your kernel yourself, you launch it from init. you can learn how to make your linux box, using a way eg busybox. Once you learned the process of kernel compiling (Linux) and how to start init, you are at the second learning step of making your own distribution from source. Then, you can build the new operating system on linus kernel the way that you like.

Many times, problems like the one of Systemd will happen. It is clear that one day you will be locked and no longer free. Packages are heavy library, and their version, dependent. Graphical applications/softwares are programmed non longer on X11, but on libraries, that take a severe time to compile. Since there are many other things to do in life, you need others, to compile for you the libraries.

The kernel and operating system of Linux is getting heavier and heavier, more and more complex. There is likely a chance some day that you won't be capable to compile it or won't have time.

Since you get a ready flavor for you, you are completely dependent on others. This is opposite of being free. If you complain today about Systemd, it means that you aren't really free. Sorry. In other words, you use the Linux flavor or in other words, the package or choices of others, including Systemd. This is not freedom, isn't it? You have to have to wait for a group of persons that will fork a distro for you.

Having simple graphical applications and simple basics can make sense to allow a basic system, this allow you to use the kernel and build your operating system the way you like. Today's dependencies have become unrealistic.

If a good application die, because there is no longer a compatibility with libraries, this means that you aren't really free. A code shall be still compilable with gcc in 10 years.

sure, why didn't i think of that.

I have a couple of systems that have X, a WM, & Firefox.
They are secure, & don't have systemd.
Also they are under 1GB in size.

What are they?

They are OpenBSD.

*BSD has been always awesome. BSD is real Unix, with all power and advantages, stable and clean. The cool thing of OpenBSD is available src on CSV.

Probably, many will move to OpenBSD/FreeBSD.

1 members found this post helpful.

I want systemd to replace my bootloader, kernel, and PackageManager in My SunOS SMF
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7203364 FUD: did L.P. simply *clone* that SMF?
systemd on wristwatch FUD: systemd is an attempt to replace electrons!

By Having tested (for a short time ) on NuTyX, I didn't get it, I'm still looking what's bring Systemd to GNU/linux world where we want:

- Simplicity (commands as short as possible)
- Modularity (one task one module / one package)
- Clean ( not reinventing stuff that's are so crucial and already maintains)
- Nothing done automaticaly in your back, the primary user is the only admin on a such OS
- I forgot the others

1 members found this post helpful.

We?

On the other hand:

- Speed of boot and shutdown
- Easy configuration. Although in theory, init scripts can always be edited, in practice they are usually too complex for an amateur sysadmin to change safely. .ini-style files are nice.

About speed, hmmm 1 sec faster (was the best I could have means with static IP adress and NO INITRD of course). As I don't care about shutdown time, it was never an argument for me.

About the scripts. you right, they are rules instead of plain bash (or other interpreters ) commands could make life easy (ones you get right the explaination of them). What's funny any way, systemd allows you to still use plain scripts files .... I wonder why

1 members found this post helpful.

The benefits of a systemd distribution () are that you can expect a bunch of components to be there, installed, ready to use. It can definitely be seen as a counterpoint in the sea of *nix platforms that present a POSIX environment that then has to be layered with some set of third party tools that might amount to everything systemd can do.