| Note that NixOS do not use containers. Instead it checksums every "package" so that only the dependencies that match exactly gets used at run time. Thus you may have multiple copies of a single lib version, depending on the compile flags used. I think what gets quite few riled up over systemd, besides the continued shoggoth-like scope creep, is the flip flopping on how things are handled. For example, if you run mount -a, mount will present an error pr failed mount, but will continue trying to mount the rest of the entries in fstab. Systemd on the other hand will fail the whole mount unit on just a single such error, and this in turn will fail the mount because various other units depends on the mount unit completing. This has bitten admins of remote systems that has gotten "upgraded" to systemd as part of a update of stable distro releases. All because they had a straggling entry in fstab that may have been sitting there quietly for a decade. Then you have them overriding a kernel default on mount namespacing, because the containers people want it that way, while others have come to rely on the kernel default being, well, default. I don't think they have yet to "solve" handing NFS mounts, instead giving the world their own take on ctrl-alt-del, while disabling the sysrq sequences. Or how systemd would (will?) blank out a environment variable via systemd-pam when su -l was used, resulting in people getting their personal settings getting mauled by root. Apparently su is "broken", according to Poettering. And now Poettering goes ahead and closes this report with what amounts to yet another "wontfix". Theodore Ts'o seemed to hit the nail on the head nearly 2 years ago[1]. [1] https://plus.google.com/+TheodoreTso/posts/4W6rrMMvhWU |