Luckily otherwise Unix would be today dead.

You could also run Slackware (or Salix) which is the closest to Unix while still being Linux.

http://www.slackware.com/getslack/

https://salixos.org/download.html

I've been on Slackware for a while now. It is all the way nice. But even venerable Slackware might have to choose between no software, or undesirable software.

unlikely, most of those systemd hard dependencies are put there by the distro maintainers.....PV and Slack team are very much against adding it. They are very familiar with avoiding unnecessary software that other distro. are quick to adopt.

Slackware is basically dictated by the main boss, if he decides that SystemD will be, it will be.

I searched back this page from DEBIAN about the "said" advantages of SysD.

To me, those arguments make really little sense:
https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd

They, Debian developers, probably forgot what is :UNIX:

True, but in all fairness, I believe the Slackware team is working very hard to stay the course despite overwhelming pressure from all sides.

Honorable mentions of Gentoo and LfS. I'm not aware of any other distros over on this side of the divide.

Ok. I don't want to read to the bottom of that page, but it seems to boil down to "we're going with the flow." I could care less about the others, but for a distro as respectable as Debian, I think that was a bit weak.

I think that it would be good for Linux that Slackware goes too for SystemD.

Debian argues that most distro i.e. fedora,... use SystemD. This is their argument. So they use SystemD.
I would be good that Slackware go for SystemD too since all Linux distributions must have something in common. SystemD will define Linux entity.

BSD is UNIX and if you want Linux, it is Linux and has nothing to do with UNIX.

The kernel is all that they need to have in common; if all distributions go systemd there will be fewer Linux (and more BSD) users*.

For the record, I don't hate systemd, and if it were small enough in scope that its replacement in a distribution were trivially easy I would almost certainly still be a systemd user. But, since it can't be easily replaced if things go pear shaped, I really can't trust it.

*Not a made up statistic, I just conducted a poll (with a sample size of 1).

The last part of your post is unclear.

If the point here is to see Linux fall and all glory to BSD, I would point out that if you are happy with your distribution the way it is, a large influx of users might be the last thing you want.

OK. Linux and BSD are luckily there for everyone, great OS, best of all time.

SystemD is a problem currently for the Linux community.
Clearly there aren't just all in favor of SysD, just looking at the poll results on LQ.

systemd blocks netflix :D
 

Interesting incendiary (noun; syn: firestarter) for the most recent SysD thread (this):

LXer news @LQ: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...ix-4175610482/
-> https://theregister.co.uk/2017/07/24...main_name_bug/
-> https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6426

btw, OP hasn't been back since 7minutes after post#2here :eek:

The core issues for me are:
- there is no specification of what it actually is. So it keeps gobbling up parts which have no business with pid 1 at all.
- the whole mentality regarding bugs or general code quality.
- documentation? Where can I find documentation on it?
- bloatware. Bad idea for something which manages pid 1.

So far we've had 27 answers and the best anyone can come up with is "it's contrary to the spirit of Unix" or anecdotal complaints. When I hear some-one screaming that it bricked their computer, then I'll worry. If we avoided all change in Linux, we'd still use Lilo, have to do all configuration by editing scripts, and lack proper package management. Oh, that would be Slackware, wouldn't it?

This is a good enough reason I think.. Anything that's missing documentation is probably hiding something, usually backdoors of some kind.