To all debian developers:
-> systemd is *fundamentally incompatible* with linux
Now, I realize that's a bold claim, but if you are up for some reading, I will prove it.
First -> a little history just to put this into a context that's easier to follow
Over a year ago (Nov 2012), I tried to *warn* you that systemd was a disaster in progress.
It started out over a discussion about udev, and some of the reasons people were giving for using systemd seemed to be woefully naive.
I tried to explain this simple point at first, but it became increasingly evident that -> none of the people who were advocating systemd -> because they claimed it would solve certain problems -> seemed to *understand* what systemd would do to *linux*
So, I took some of the problems systemd was supposed to fix, and wrote a response that primarily did three things.
1 -> explain *why* linux had certain *mechanisms*, and what would happen if you removed them
2 -> show *how* those problems could be *solved* without stripping out very important pieces of the architecture (which systemd would do, knowingly or not)
3 -> the *most important* one -> probe how much the systemd people *really understood* about what they were doing to the rest of linux
Now, I'm sure many people will jump on that last one right there and declare -> how can you possibly judge what they understand if you don't understand it yourself?!!
And this is *how*...
There is a well known saying that runs in every engineering discipline, including software engineering...
-> if you can't put it in writing, then you don't understand it well enough
Einstein had another version...
-> if you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough
So, I presented a series of *technical questions*, that I asked to be answered *without* references for *me* to go *read documentation*.
Those questions are *not* there because I'm clueless as to how systemd works.
Those questions are there to see if *anyone* (including systemd people) had any clue how systemd would *interoperate* with -> the rest of linux.
And I got my answer.
I even said -> the *point* of this post was to see if these questions *could* be answered -> because if they couldn't -> that was a *very strong* signal that they *didn't understand it*
And I got several responses, many of them saying I was...
-> wasting everyone's time because I didn't read the documentation
-> weird (lol)
-> and in some places elsewhere over the internet -> autistic
I even went to Lennart Poettering's google+ page and ....
-> tried to warn everyone there that systemd was headed for failure
-> asked *Poettering* (in a different way) if he *could answer* what role systemd was to serve in linux
I said -> I have a question for you. If you can answer it with one, and ONLY one, concept that describes fully what systemd is I will consider I might have misjudged this.
-> systemd is a suite of basic building blocks to build an OS from
Okay -> right there he gives two important pieces of information...
1 -> there is *nothing* about how it works with linux
2 -> his answer is so *vague*, it should tell you *he hasn't really thought this out*
systemd will *wreck* linux, I am certain of it.
*Without* some kind of *design blueprint* of some sort -> systemd ended up being built by *programming blindly in the dark*.
There is no *boundary* where systemd stops and linux begins.
They will keep on absorbing pieces of linux until systemd is the entire operating system -> and there is no coherent design to how it does / should work.
I think everyone here knows how this is going to end.
I tried to get this point across back in Nov 2012 -> however, I don't think systemd caused enough chaos back then to really register with people what was coming their way.
Now that systemd has wrecked all kinds of previously working stuff, and many are beginning to realize the *impossibility* of getting systemd to work *with* linux -> I think this might have some effect this time around.
-> Debian needs to *cut all ties* to systemd
It is *not possible* to save it *unless* a design blueprint for how it works *with* linux can be *expressed in writing* -> and I seriously doubt anyone can (I sure as hell can't).
-> revert every program systemd took over to its pre-systemd state
-> cut your losses while you still can technically achieve a reversion
While systemd *might* one day work flawlessly on its own -> it has *absolutely no business* being in linux.
And you might ask -> why did I put this on the debian list? This clearly applies to *all* of linux...
-> because out of any linux distro that stands a *reasonable chance* to undo the systemd nightmare -> debian is the *most visible* -> and other distros are more likely to *follow your lead* than any other distro that might change
If you think I am wrong -> let's settle the debate, once and for all.
If systemd *can* work *with* linux -> these questions *can* be answered.
(look for '?' to spot them)
For *concrete reasoning* on why systemd is a disaster...
And for those looking to follow everything I said back in Nov 2012...
And now for the alarmist and overly dramatic conclusions.....
Sorry for the intrusion into your world, but this *needed* to be said, and needed to be said on *this* specific list.
-> the *future* of linux actually *does* depend on what -> you <- *do* here
Debian is a big name, and other distros are likely to follow your lead if you break away from systemd. All it takes is for one domino to fall here to set off a chain reaction to free linux from this madness.
I don't think Red Hat or Ubuntu are capable of starting this process (there's too much corporate / monetary control over them), so Debian, you're it.
systemd is turning linux into a dysfunctional and useless operating system -> we *have* to remove it.
I know it will take a *crap ton of work* to remove systemd from debian (and linux in general), but systemd is *terminal*. If you don't, there is *no future* for you.