Systemd is supposed to replace all init systems in the GNU/Linux
world. A lot of people "hate" it but powerful people like it. Arch
Linux developers like it, some kernel developers like it.
Sadly, most people who "hate" it do so because systemd is in an early
stage of development. Some things don't work well -- yet. That's not
the point, though. All your bugs will get fixed. Once that's done, you
"haters" will like systemd, too!
Some guy on a BSD forum said:
Linux users don't care how something works as long as it works.
Why am *I* getting angry? Because systemd imposes a hell lot of
complexity on me -- without offering me any advantages. See, Arch
Linux's initscripts work. They do everything I want and they're
simple; I can understand them. Systemd *can't* do any better because
initscripts are *already* perfect. I don't care about systemd's
current bugs, I merely care about the following question:
What problem(s) does systemd solve?
For me: None. Some people may take an advantage of systemd. I don't.
But I *must* deal with systemd. I can't simply ignore it. Sooner or
later, it's going to be the default init system in Arch Linux -- and
every other distro. Not even Gentoo (who praise their own OpenRC init
system) will be able to avoid systemd.
Let's just hope that things improve. Let's hope that systemd still
allows you to run a minimalistic setup. Let's hope that it does NOT
rely on all the kits (polkit, devicekit, ...) or even Gnome. Please,
please, Lennart, please allow users to run a simple desktop. Please
allow us to run our own cron and at daemons. Please allow us to
manually mount devices. Please allow us to run a "traditional" syslog
and (x)inetd.
