Le 20/07/2014 13:56, Andrei POPESCU a écrit : > On Sb, 19 iul 14, 20:16:11, The Wanderer wrote: >> Unless I'm much mistaken, none of the tools provided by coreutils are >> daemons, and none of them are init systems. Both of those things are >> qualitative differences. >> >> I didn't mention any of the non-daemon tools provided by the systemd >> package, for that exact reason. > I was trying to point out that splitting the systemd package would not > provide much benefit. Feel free to come up with a useful split to prove > me wrong. > > Kind regards, > Andrei No, because the systemd was designed this way as a monolithic bundle, with interdependencies everywhere. You cannot get logind withouyt changing the way you log things, and the way you start services. It is a design decision of systemd, and (in my opinion) one of its weaknesses. Add to this the fact it throws away years of habits with yet another language (yes the systemd unit files are nit shellscripts but they use a specific language mre complicated to understand thant shell scripts, without all literature one can find on shell scripting, and without a proper introduction and migration doc). It is not tested in real field before being imposed to everybody, and it is still lacks features because it is thought only for the dresktop whose user is also the admin : no feature of cebtralised configuration for a parc, no advantage for servers, and returns are ugly (see people saying switching to systemd made the shutdown of their computer take several minutes, without any answer since nobody except the zealots who refuse to acknowledge the problems knows how to debug). systemd may have advantages but the change is much too fast, untested and will lead to big problems that many of us cannot afford.
Description: OpenPGP digital signature