@samurro

The fact that you take on the time to react is a Plus. The fact that you have taken the time to read up on the article of Stefano is another Plus.

Any reaction is a good reaction.

Contrary to certain people on certain sections of the internet, I cannot be offended by anything that I read upon in a reaction towards me on the internet.

You put an interesting Twist on it which I have looked up on also.
Technology should not move on for the fact of moving on.

Software should not be dropped just because other software has been developed and works well if the previous software is good solid and **stable**

Contrary to what you may believe, it has nothing to do with being a greybeard or not. It has more to do with the fact that you should not, as a distribution maintenance team, drop a command set, which has no negatives in comparison with the new one, especially not if the established command set does not take a significant amount of space in comparison with a new one.

The beauty of OpenSource computing is that many different points of view can concurrently exist without sending any negative energy towards each other

Just look for example at Gnome and KDE. In the beginning I could use both because both Gnome and KDE were easily modified. When Gnome went a different direction I dropped using it. However there were still many hundreds of thousands of people who liked the way Gnome went
Just as there were also many hundreds of thousands of people who loved the way that KDE kept going.

Now we are decades further and the Smart Ones under us realize that Gnome needs KDE to exist and visa versa.

That's The Beauty and The Power of Open Source.

Have a good day My Man

Still reading the lengthy article regarding SystemD on Wikipedia this is another interesting excerpt

In April 2014, Linus Torvalds expressed reservations about the attitude of Kay Sievers, a key systemd developer, toward users and bug reports in regard to modifications to the Linux kernel submitted by Sievers. In late April 2014, a campaign to boycott systemd was launched, with a website listing various reasons against its adoption.

@duncan_bayne

I started to dislike SystemD more and more, as I saw that most distributions were putting hooks for SystemD in case a user would want to switch to it and started with one of the other options initially, on that particular installation.
With the hooks in place that process usually goes seamlessly.

In my proud opinion, if you don't want to use SystemD, nothing of it should ever be on your system

Now I can easily achieve that by just building my Linux from scratch, and I'm not talking about the Linux from scratch distribution, I'm talking about the way I did it when Linux was initially pushed into alt.binaries.Unix many decades ago.

All variants of *BSD have made sure that all the commands which could break, like the ifconfig commands suite we're simply fixed!

But this is the the dilemma that you will get, when the kernel is just built for itself and it's not a coherent part of the base Operating System.

What you get in practice is that your kernel wants to move a certain way, while the userland software wants to move in a different way

That kind of friction would kill a human corpus. On Linux systems and servers it literally breaks things in an unexpected manner, something that you cannot afford when you're running a database where you get two million calls an hour. A database that runs in high availability with just one other VM as a concurrent live backup

I did not know that SystemD created such a fuzz & FUD in the Debian community, that people resigned their positions in the Year 2014, because it was impossible to maintain with SystemD, there there was such an amount of friction within the FOSS community that regular maintenance became impossible, heavy stress levels were triggered for these Atma's!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd?wprov=sfla1

#bash #sh #zsh #ksh #csh #tsh #freeBSD #100DaysOfCode #1000DaysOfCode #POSIX #Programming #Patch #RetroComputing #UNIX #History

/3

Mind you that I'm not saying that new command should not be developed, on a contrary; what I am saying, is that if for whatever reason, certain things change, you need to make sure that the older commands still work properly, because they are in our muscle memory
Those of us, the greybeards, have commands in our muscle memory, remember that

And for those of you who do not know,

Most of the systems that are running the internet, are built, installed and maintained, by us, the greybeards!

They are not built the young ones, who are barely 20 years old, who do not know the difference between a compiler and a debugger!

/3

SystemD has so much going on, that I shall suffice by pointing you to the article. The words of Stefano need no more addition towards the subject of systemd.

On my systems I avoid Systemd like the plague. Now read that three times out loud...

If you want to know more about Systemd in detail, just go and read the many different good documents on the internet, please do not use Google to search for them use anything else, DuckDuckGo does it much better.

This is one example where you learn what the Systemd stands for

Repeating Stefano's words: why was it needed? Everything worked perfectly fine before Systemd came in, there was no reason for its existence.

I have included the Wikipedia article; take your Time to at least glance at it, because the writers have tried to give a Balanced View of the Pro and the cons of Systemd

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd?wprov=sfla1

/2

@Dendrobatus_Azureus

Now busy with the install. Just did a flatpack install of fwupd since my distro has a old version

@Dendrobatus_Azureus

Thank you for that valuable massive tag! I shall look into putting GrapheneOS on One of My Androids, today