|
|
|
|
|
|
by einpoklum
19 days ago
|
|
|
> It's not If you're using RedHat or Debian and most of their derivative distributions, it is. > people chose systemd because it's actually better No, they did not. Most people did not choose systemd, their Linux distributions did. RedHat chose their own system for their own distributions; on Debian, a controvertial process foisted it onto the distribution using gaslit rhetoric; and I don't know much about the process elswehre. > The point was That was not the point. > It's just not "standards compliant" This is the straw man you've created. Neither my post nor most critique of systemd regards "standards compliance". |
|
|
Use a better distribution.
Arch Linux has entire wiki pages dedicated to alternative init systems. Anyone can download, install and use OpenRC or whatever they want if they really care enough. People actually took the time to document the process.
Linux is whatever you make of it. There is nothing stopping you from installing whatever you want. I could write an init today and start using it immediately. I don't need anybody's permission to do it.
> Most people did not choose systemd, their Linux distributions did.
By "people" I meant the people who make and maintain the distributions. They're the ones who actually choose what to ship in their projects. Users either accept it, look elsewhere or take on the maintenance burden unto themselves.
No doubt they chose systemd because it made their lives monumentally easier. Maintaining my own computer with systemd is pretty much painless. I don't even remember what it was like before.
> Neither my post nor most critique of systemd regards "standards compliance".
> we've started to see this sort of bifrucation of a lot more FOSS away from being standard-based and multi-platform to being Linux-specific.
No idea what "standard" you're referring to if not POSIX.