Originally posted by BwackNinja
View Post
[13] Myth: systemd being Linux-only is not nice to the BSDs.
We now see efforts like the OpenBSD systembsd implementing the interfaces like timedated, hostnamed, and logind because upstream projects depend directly on the interfaces that only systemd implements. "The assumption that they'd adopt our core userspace if we just made it portable, is completely without any foundation." They don't want to use systemd, but they've been forced into a corner where they have to pretend that they're systemd.
We now see efforts like the OpenBSD systembsd implementing the interfaces like timedated, hostnamed, and logind because upstream projects depend directly on the interfaces that only systemd implements. "The assumption that they'd adopt our core userspace if we just made it portable, is completely without any foundation." They don't want to use systemd, but they've been forced into a corner where they have to pretend that they're systemd.
[15] Myth: systemd could be ported to other kernels if its maintainers just wanted to. and [16] Myth: systemd is not portable for no reason.
While systemd has been against supporting anything other than linux, glibc, and the like (which is well within their right to do), uselessd is doing quite the opposite and apparently succeeding at running on FreeBSD, using other libcs such as musl and uclibc, and getting rid of the gnu-isms while still managing to be a systemd-compatible init system. That makes uselessd a viable option for a lot of people where systemd is not - even before you start talking about how they've stripped down systemd.
While systemd has been against supporting anything other than linux, glibc, and the like (which is well within their right to do), uselessd is doing quite the opposite and apparently succeeding at running on FreeBSD, using other libcs such as musl and uclibc, and getting rid of the gnu-isms while still managing to be a systemd-compatible init system. That makes uselessd a viable option for a lot of people where systemd is not - even before you start talking about how they've stripped down systemd.
I've been a systemd supporter and loved it while building an LFS system years ago that I still use as my main system. It is the init system that makes the most sense, but what happens when it stops being A building block and starts being THE building block as it refers to itself in [18]? We get things like Void Linux switching away from it, and not because it stopped being a good init system, but because it became a lot of everything else. The increasingly all-incompassing systemd only becomes less and less desirable the further you are to its aims, while the small part that is the init system becomes less and less worth the trouble. The uselessd page involves no attacks on the developers of systemd nor the project. In fact, it's very existence is a clear statement that the core of systemd and its work in the init system space is wonderful and is worth being used and relied upon even if you have disagreements about where the project as a whole is going. That's powerful. That's positive. I hope they achieve enough success and support to continue to exist - not because I hate systemd, but because I like systemd.
Comment