Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
systemd cat and GNU cat hugging a Linux cat.
So the old init.d system was better? Come on people, let's stop infighting. I have zero preference on init systems. You know why? Because they're just plumbing. Stop this nonsense. Do I click on an init system? Do I use the init system to check my email? Or play games? No. I know poettering can be controversial, but let's just move on. Run freebsd if you're so butt hurt.
So much more than an init system though, which I think is why people don't like it. Personally, the only annoyance I have is I preferred log files over journald.
So the old init.d system was better?
because those are our only two options...
I hate this argument so much, because it's just a fallacy.
There are (and have been) more solid init systems.
Yeah, on a desktop I don't really mind whatever*. On a server however, I think systemd is great and I wouldn't want to miss it anymore.
* except Debian's frankenstein systemd + sysvinit combination. Burn it
As a user, why should I care whether the distro I use uses systemd? I use Mint and I don't remember having to interact with that kind of low-level nonsense. The distro maintainers can use whatever reasoning they want to pick these details.
Tribalism exists in every circle, perhaps moreso in tech circles. Ironically anyone who hates on a distro could just switch, or build their own distro if they were so inclined, but it's often the hating that people participate more in than using their system. Use what works for you, and if it no longer works for you use something else.
As a user, why should I care whether the distro I use uses systemd?
Um, because as a user you may have to deal with services, or other systemd features?
Let's say you want to start ssh-agent when you login to your desktop environment. Well, there's a systemd service for that that you can enable, and on another distro you'd have to do it another way (autostart script or something).
If you are just a user, in that a computer is just a tool you use, then you're right, there's comparatively little reason to be concerened or even know about the underlying details of the system. If you go further and start making changes to your system, or even building more complex systems, over time you will find yourself forming quite firm opinions about various parts of the underlying system, especially if you've had experience with other options.
I have to write startup scripts time-to-time and I have to say that I donβt miss at all the old init-system.
Not that systemd donβt have flaws, but in old init-system even simplest daemon took too many lines. Not to mention hacky comment definitions.
GNU cat
You mean GNU cat?
Guix
Defintely this, it's also the best option to run Fediverse instances such as Bonfire https://fishinthecalculator.me/blog/bonfire--guix-a-love-story.html
Void, because it works really well on my super low-resource chromebook!
Totally Guix, it has no systemd and is able to roll back to the last working in case you break anything somehow
I was literally reading your guide about bonfire moments ago.
For those who don't have a problem with systemd, there is NixOS, which offers the same capabilities as guix, while having a larger community and way more available packages available in its repos.
System service managers like systemd, OpenRC, runit, or SysVinit often come down to user preference. While these systems are crucial for initializing and managing services on servers, where uptime, resource allocation, and specific daemon behaviors are important, their impact on a typical desktop or laptop is generally minimal.
For most personal devices, the primary functions of a service manager occur largely out of sight. As long as the system boots reliably and applications run smoothly, the underlying service manager rarely registers as a significant factor in the daily user experience.
For many, including myself, systemd simply works without much fuss. My choice to stick with it isn't due to strong conviction or deep technical analysis, but rather the simple fact that I've rarely, if ever, had to interact with it directly. For my personal desktop and laptop, it reliably handles booting, service management, and shutdown in the background. If it's not broken and isn't hindering my daily computing, there's no compelling reason to explore alternatives.
cat head but no tail
Void Linux, although I use NixOS nowadays.
Artix is an under-appreciated gem.
Alpine.
Have used crux but using low end / old hardware results in almost permanent building software.