"LP is an a**hole" A great summary, that. And convenient for when one forgets his name but needs to mention him. In such a case, then the name can be found by web-searching for 'systemd a**hole' -the same way I find the name of the glibc developer by searching for 'glibc a**hole'

a***holes (UK spelling) are useful and necessary for excretion. What exactly are LP & KS useful for?

Um.... does not computer! ERROR!!! ERROR!!!

And learn to read my statement of how I see LP and KS... I said he's POSSIBLY a sociopath on some level.

Learn to actually fully read posts before you make snarly remarks and try to twist words to fit your own agendas.

And then next go read up on Lennart himself and see how well he does and doesn't profile.

Truth be told we've seen years and years of you spreading your [whatever it is that you spread] and rarely accompanied by any constructive remarks. And the fact that a larger part of the slackware community condones or ignores your outbreaks of [whatever it is that you spread] doesn't mean that one shouldn't try and stop a b0rken record. So, could you please tone down the ranting a bit and actually focus on solutions? I'm confident that would greatly improve the atmosphere of any systemd-related discussion. Thanks in advance.

Who, me? What? I always read your posts assiduously (I'll look that up later, see if it means what I think it means). :)

This thread as well as http://boycottsystemd.org/ should be required reading for anyone wanting to contribute to a systemd discussion.

systemd is extremely dangerous.

systemd is the sabotage of Linux's
* Security
* Diversity
* Reliability
* Openness
* Ethos / Spirit

But only for the fools who use distros that use systemd.

It's sad to see Debian go (and indirectly Ubuntu as well). These distros are not only destroying themselves, but will leave a wake of destruction in their path. All the people ignorantly using Debian and Ubuntu will result in a lot of new software being built with dependencies directly and indirectly on systemd.
The extent of destruction by systemd depends to a large extent upon Debian's use of systemd. If enough Debian users object, then this destruction can be avoided to a large extent.

systemd is the sabotage of Linux. And this is not an exaggeration. This truth is even evident when you read their creators negative comments about linux. They have large egos, delusions of grandeur, thinking they KNOW what is wrong with Linux, and that they KNOW what is better.

systemd === system destruction

No need to revive this old thread just to state again an opinion already stated by others many times in this forum.

wow quite the coding drama... but I have been there. Linus is right. Sievers needs to fix the problem and not sweep it under the rug. On Development teams I have been on this kind of consistent behaviour would have gotten the developer booted.

After doing some more reading, I see that while the risks of systemd are significant, so are the improvements that it brings to the table.

I think the risks of security, reliability, openness etc are present initially, but over any major issues will be discovered, and some diversity will exist once more with forks that may address potential design issues.

Systemd has really raised the bar beyond any other existing project of it's kind. This is why it has swallowed up so many distros so quickly. Once everyone's standards and expectations have adjusted, I have little doubt that diversity will exist again.

Aside from forks, there will be alternatives to some the 69 systemd binaries, where people decide to do things differently.

Interesting reads
https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/inits...ult_to_systemd

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html

https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte.../msg00234.html

http://www.itwire.com/business-it-ne...ons-on-systemd

1. This is not the Debian subforum!
2. The change already happend.

jtsn: People have complained many times in this thread that the discussion is offtopic for Slackware. And indeed the vast majority of the posts are about systemd and have nothing to do with Slackware. Google brought me to this page because I was looking for a systemd discussion.

However, unfortunately for Slackers (assuming that's what you like to be called) this thread is what it is. And if you'd like for the discussion to end, you should ask a mod to move/lock it. Personally I don't intend to contribute further to it, but you'll probably find others will keep it going unless it's moved/locked.

The discussion did end before you stepped in. If you want to continue discussing about systemd in the Slackware forum you could just choose an active thread instead, so that we have all the discussion on that topic occurring in one place. You could use the "Search this forum" feature, or just go here. This is just a suggestion, of course.

it brings far less real improvements then one might think

socket activation is useless
process tracking, if you could call trowing things into cgroups proper process tracking, is easy to add to any init
(including scripts)
checking if the program is "up" is not done by checking if the program is properly running but just if its running
(so a non functioning process would be reported as "running", while for example you can ask apache if its working propery)
binary log is... binary and the current logging form is good and standardized
(systemd log does not use that standard)
systemd does not bring much to security
in fact you can't properly restrict access to proc

so the improvements are minimal while the restrictions are there
and that improvements can be done without systemd (as they were intended)

No, systemd was mostly ignored until udev introduced a systemd dependency.

Once this happened, most of the major distributions adopted systemd to continue using the latest udev releases. Not all, though. Gentoo forked udev to remove the dependency (eudev), and Slackware and Debian use old, pre-systemd versions of udev (though political machinations in Debian's technical committee have introduced systemd to Debian anyway, causing considerable strife within the Debian community).

After eudev was picked up by several other Linux distributions, Lennart declared the intention to have device driver developers rewrite their software to use the systemd-dependent kdbus interface instead of the traditional netlink interface. If this is successful, it will increase the maintenance burden of using eudev (as must-have new device drivers would have to be ported to use netlink).

The widespread adoption of systemd has nothing to do with its supposed merits, and everything to do with weaponized software dependencies.

Funny, it is totally possible to run the latest udev (not eudev) on Gentoo without installing systemd, Robby Workman offers packages for Slackware, of course also without any systemd dependency. Seeing that you get this basic information wrong I won't comment the rest of your post.

P.S.: I accidentally rated your post as helpful, either my fingers are to large or my tablet is to small.