Lets face it, it’s a software engineering marvel. There is no two ways about it. Fast, reliable, versatile and maintainable, systemd is an extremely powerful piece of technology that has revolutionized GNU/Linux and it has been working wonders on my new Arch Linux box and has made my life much easier. No doubt I have heard from many others saying the same thing all around blogs and forums. The one place I did not hear nice things about systemd is the same place in which I never hear anything nice about Linux. BSD people’s mouths (example: scalisblog, freebsd forums etc.).
But systemd was not made for BSD and has not been running on BSD ever so why are these mindless zealots making such fuss and accusations about it?
It’s because more and more FLOSS applications are integrating with systemd and thus making use of the advanced features it offers. However in doing so, they effectively incorporate features that can only be satisfied by the Linux kernel and thus making them difficult or impossible to port to other non-Linux kernels such as the BSDs. This will inevitably lead to the BSD’s being starved of both properly working server and desktop applications and environments (e.g. GNOME, Xfce etc.) which will in turn reduce the usefulness and attractiveness of BSD even farther.
So is it the GNU/Linux people’s problem that this sort of thing happened? Absolutely not. The fault is with the BSDs which fail to keep up as they cannot expect GNU/Linux developers to slow down just for them. GNU/Linux developers also should not be burdened with making their software portable and helping BSD as it would be silly to help out your competitors especially in this case when the competitors are proprietary friendly pieces of junk. In fact the greatest advantage of systemd is that it can be used as a tool for free software projects to prevent their software from being ported to BSD.
In effect, systemd is becoming the bane of BSD.
“systemd” is not only one problem of BSD Unix is one big problem of all another UNIX, like Solaris and OpenIndiana, and UNIX-like systems. The future of the server is with graphical elements (not all, but parts). GNOME, KDE, and other GUI are made for UNIX and UNIX-like systems, not only for Linux. Read the history of the graphic interfaces and you see Linux is only one user/systema of many.
Bane of BSD, it’s hardly even mentioned on the OpenBSD list atleast, maybe two very short threads stemming from things like Gnome. Even Redhat devs have said it has very insignificant impact.
Anything that takes s much time on BSD lists is almost guarnteed to have flaws.
I never fancy OpenBSDs record of two holes in over a decade not incrementing because they never ported systemd. There’s been more holes in OpenBSD than PAM and the BSD kernel would be at hundreds of hole in less than a decade but of course a bugs a bug right. Ignorance is bliss and an easy life of course, hence Linux dominance.
8-8-2013. Jordan Hubbard has defected to apple, BSD’s sex master. This may be the end for FreeBSD.
I quite enjoy using systemd that’s why I greatly prefer Fedora as a free OS. It’s far more secure then BSD.
When I installed OpenBSD, it got hacked within 3 minutes. When I installed Fedora, it never got hacked.
Why should Linux developers spend any time on maintaining backwards compatibility? It’s the BSD community’s own fault for clinging onto abandonware. Even Bell Labs broke away from Unix in favour of Plan 9.
At least with Plan 9 you can justify the effort of rewriting drivers and porting software since it’s empirically a superior design. BSD makes no such claim. It’s for the sake of pure nostalgia. Nothing more.
Linux’s systemd is the final nail in the coffin for crap like PC-BSD, FreeBSD, CrapBSD etc. it is a feature which pushes Linux farther and farther ahead of it’s BSD competitors.
Ironic isn’t it, BSD dumb asses claim that with PC-BSD, FreeBSD will catch up to Linux but from 2007 to now, BSD has instead fell farther and farther behind rapidly. Today, it’s not relevant even in the BSD world.