This is the classic reaction that is so empty of content, I am sorry, but systemd can’t keep hiding behind the excuse of being better than sysvinit. Ever since daemontools (decades ago) those who defend systemd keep talking about sysvinit. Out of daemontools many forks or inspired systems were developed. Runit reached the end of development 8 years ago, 0 bugs, 100% of goals met, still works with every distro and kernel flawlessly. s6 makes runit look archaic, and unable to do what s6 can.
Yet systemd’s defense is “it is better than sysvinit, or BSD scripts”.
For proper critique of systemd see the skarnet.org site under the specific thread. As far as I know there is no rational counter argument to what is presented there. If you have such I am sure the authors of skarnet.org would publish it, it is how s6 got better and better.
This is the classic reaction that is so empty of content, I am sorry, but systemd can’t keep hiding behind the excuse of being better than sysvinit. Ever since daemontools (decades ago) those who defend systemd keep talking about sysvinit. Out of daemontools many forks or inspired systems were developed. Runit reached the end of development 8 years ago, 0 bugs, 100% of goals met, still works with every distro and kernel flawlessly. s6 makes runit look archaic, and unable to do what s6 can.
Yet systemd’s defense is “it is better than sysvinit, or BSD scripts”.
For proper critique of systemd see the skarnet.org site under the specific thread. As far as I know there is no rational counter argument to what is presented there. If you have such I am sure the authors of skarnet.org would publish it, it is how s6 got better and better.