[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

complaints about systemd

Hello all,

I just want to load off my bad mood :) so let me tell you, today i deinstalled systemd.

There were several problems, like with shut down, when sound card state should be saved but created a guru. Sometimes it didn't even boot because some ACPI thing stuck. Also my reboot / shutdown keys did not work anymore. I did not have these problems with sysvinit and now they seem to be gone again.

The next thing i don't like is the configuration, which is anything but intuitive. I had a hard time to find out how to fine tune my booting again (which requires some small custom adaptions), or to just shut up the massive message blurb that systemd loaded off my terminals, but still have a human readable logging. 

What pisses me off the most however is that the upgrade did not even ask me, if i want to switch.

I read up the architecture description and i'm shocked. The new systemd swallows a lot of essential subsystems (like udev and acpid) and its hunger seems still not satisfied. The main developers (which seem to be just 2 guys, only, which also is quite shocking for me, given the essential importance and critical freshness of the whole thing!) even state they want to integrate and streamline as much as possible. 

However, i'm quite sure that the old unix way of 'splitting it up into small specialized parts' is much more robust. For example, if one component is not working correctly, it can replaced . With systemd, you don't have this choice anymore and the whole system will be affected, in worst case, break down. You'll need to wait until upstream fixes your little thing, and with such a small developer base, and deep integration, it's highly questionable if that will be anything like timely, or happen at all. (These always were particular features of the Microsoft OS which i never was able to accept.)  

Having a choice also implies more security, because a secured system which set of active components are rather unknown can't be easily cracked. As a network admin, i'm totally against the idea of general 'streamlining'.

Now it seems the developers managed to convince gnome to create a dependency to systemd. It only means, i will not use gnome anymore. I hope KDE is not that silly.

I know this topic does not strictly belong here, well, but let's see if anyone here likes to argue my ideas. I don't even now to whom to complain, since i don't want systemd to get better, but rather, a completely different approach, and first of all with much broader agreement and support from upstream developers.
But if it boils down to 'do it yourself' which then this is clearly beyond my scope. I'm on the looser side here.

(But does anyone know who would be responsible for the switch, in Debian ?)

Kind regards,



Reply to: