Systemd Debate

What do you dislike about systemd? Do you disagree with the ideas behind it, or is your discontentment more about the specific implementation of those ideas? Can you give examples?

What axe did they grind? I've got only good things to say about systemd so perhaps I can't understand the issue?

Systemd is an init system that tries to do everything: system init, hardware monitoring to load drivers on demand, configure networking, rerun failed jobs, service management, and it comes with a binary-format logger.The claimed advantages of systemd are mostly relevant, IMHO, for mobile devices that change configuration often. It brings no particular advantage to servers or desktops, unless you tend to swap out lots of peripherals on your desktop.The disadvantages are partially political

Sorry for your loss. I personally find that systemd solves real problems and makes Linux better. It has worts, but so does everything.

It's odd that you included systemd in the list. It's something that a casual user isn't going to notice, but that has made life easier for system administrators and desktop tinkerers. With systemd, I can write a few lines of config to turn a simple Python script into a daemon with syslog integration, process monitoring, and resource limits. I understand the concerns about scope creep, but I'd take systemd any day over the maze of distro-specific shell scripts that was there b

For what it's worth, systemd makes my life easier.When I switch distro, it's almost always systemd, and not the system du jour, so I know how it works. Creating service files is a google query away, and makes common use cases a breathe, while advanced features that were hard to bash script yourself into, are now just a few options to type.I understand that many people may have problems with systemd for their particular situation, but that's not my experience.As a dumb use

I concur with your characterisation of systemd as “doing one thing, and doing it well”. Those who seem to malign it most are those who are, for historical reasons, profoundly conversant with the myriad daemons, configurations, and init systems (generally) of “old UNIX/Linux”. They have a point and a genuine axe to grind, I’ll concede, but systemd is an enormous simplifier for those who are recent to the scene: learn systemd, and you’ve learnt how to manage (most) of you

systemd looks like it was forced somehow on distros. I was happy with sysvinit, no issues with it as a simple user on laptop. But now I have issues with systemd once a month, I really hate that thing and don't see any benefits.

I'm not surprised. systemd reinventing and horribly overcomplicating things is nothing new.

Honestly I'd prefer systemd over the mess that is init.d