Sujet : Re: Syst?me D
De : sebastian (at) *nospam* here.com.invalid (Sebastian)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacyDate : 19. May 2024, 11:03:06
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v2cf88$3a9j7$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3
User-Agent : tin/2.6.2-20221225 ("Pittyvaich") (Linux/6.1.0-18-amd64 (x86_64))
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <
ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2024 09:08:31 -0000 (UTC), Sebastian obviously hasn?t read
the biggest myths about systemd <http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-
biggest-myths.html>:
This contrasts with Systemd, which has more in common with communism. It
demands that everything be remade the Systemd way ...
It doesn?t demand anything. It?s Open Source, which means it respects your
freedoms. Also, like all good system software, it is designed to offer
?mechanism, not policy?. It provides the mechanisms, which you can
configure to implement whatever policies you like.
... and has forced many poorly-reinvented wheels on
us in the process ...
It is made up of modular pieces. Outside of the core (init, journald,
udevd), everything else is optional.
Getting rid of non-core Systemd components is easier said than done on most
distros. You didn't list systemd-logind in the "core" components,
implying it's optional, but try setting up a Debian or Fedora system
without it. Even Devuan, whose reason for existence is to be a
Systemd-free Debian, had to use a fork of systemd-logind rather than
just handling sessions the pre-Systemd way, because so many things
have been made to depend on it.