thanatos_incarnate wrote:But feel free to keep me in the dark, that way I will surely be convinced of your way.
Nobody convinced me one way or the other in deciding to fight against Debians decision to foist Systemd on the next stable release. I came to that decision after a long bout of searching the net and reading the Systemd docs, as well as sifting through all the various blogs and forum posts about it on a whole host of websites and Distro specific entries. This is how it works. You have A LOT of reading to catch up on!
In the beginning I was as incrudulous as anyone that a piece of software could get anyone up in arms. Education has taught me the
why, and reading the tech news and email lists on Systemd keeps me informed. While it is easy enough to find outraged posts, it is harder to find educated threads that really discuss the matter deliberately and calmly. You will find the same common threads:
0. Systemd breaks POSIX and is incompatible with the BSDs. That is not good in regards to Debian, which claims to be the
Universal OS, and runs counter to the open arms ideology Debian has always espoused.
1. Systemd has become monolithic. Too many dependancies create lockin. The code has become obfuscated and only a core cadre of devs really know whats going on. Sure, it is open source. Feel free to read through the thousands of lines of code to try to figure it out!
2. The most egregious is that one cannot run an alternate init system, such as SysV, OpenRC, or Upstart. So what? This runs counter to Debians Social Contract, which clearly states that the needs of its USERS come first. What if I don't want to run Systemd? A whole lot of folks don't want to run Systemd. So its tough luck for us! Use it or leave! Debian is an exclusive club now, or so the Debian Devs say on the mailing list, if you read it. But for Jessie, and probably only Jessie, alternate init may be possible thanks to a small handful of Devs who care about this stuff.
3. Systemd functions as a Windows-style svchost. Give a google on that to find out the obvious attack potential and exploitability of such a massive attack surface. Microsoft has been dealing with that for the last decade or more. Now, it's our turn!
4. The Systemd devs are "my way or F!ck Y$u"! Due to the dependancy lockin of a larger and larger core system component spread that are now tied to Systemd, nobody has a choice anymore. We all are now at the mercy of Lennart Poetering and his ilk. He has a growing number of major Distros all at his mercy. He has virtually
all major upstream projects as a result by the throat. Why is that? As I said before, the fact that all major distros are locked into Systemd, and that Systemd has a huge number of dependant core functions, virtually every piece of software will have to tie-in to Systemd to work at all.
Above are just a tiny few reasons. I did not mention the UNIX model, because I am not that interested in it, although it does make a whole lot of sense. There are many more reasons. The only real way to find out which side you are on is to search and find out for yourself.