Are there any comparisons of init systems that focus daily use metrics? Stuff like what writing scripts looks like and boot times and logging capabilities? (And any other use cases that are common)
Are there any comparisons of init systems that focus daily use metrics? Stuff like what writing scripts looks like and boot times and logging capabilities? (And any other use cases that are common)
There are significant security/reliability improvements all over the place. E…g. logind actually works as promissed, which none of the clones do as they can not have the necessary infrastructure that is provided by other parts of systemd. Or udev using systemd-pid1 to start services: That fixes a well documented problem with udev starting services itself – which most non-systemd distributions do till today. Problems do notngo away by ignoring them.
Checkout non-systemd distros, most of them still use group based access to devices a user needs to run wayland. Of course that does not matter at all for X11, security is so poor there anyway.
Yeah, but things like human readable logs are almost all gone because of journalctl changes that went into the systemd ecosystem without anyone really running by folks who look at logs everyday.
It’s not the functionality of systemd I don’t like, it’s the Poettering way of just making changes to stuff without bothering to learn how any of the rest of us professionally use things.
I look at logs everyday and for me it’s good.
Yeap, you now get logs from all stages of the boot process, and you notice logs going bad or getting manipulated. It’s a huge step forward for Linux, especially for people that look at logs every day. They can finally trust the logs to be correct and complete.
And it is not even a change: I have never had real unix servers with plain text logs in 30 years working with them. Proper computers have always stored logs in databases or whatever. That’s actually a legal requirement in many parts of the world for many kindsmof servers.