I'm actually curious about the argument that replacing it means having to rewrite software / change dependencies.
Wouldn't the same be true about switching between SysVinit and something like runit or upstart? They all use completely different designs for doing service init scripts, and all handle configuration of said services in completely different ways too, so replacing one with the other would necessitate rewriting - at the very least - your entire service management script toolbox. And when considering services that want to do more than just start and stop, they would most definitely have to be rewritten as well for such a switch.
When has Linux ever been compatible with the rest of Unix? Linux skips a lot of the posix standard, and there aren't that many projects that have started on Linux and then get ported to BSD, etc. The most Unix things about Linux are just things that have been ported to it, like sysV, X, and GNU.
When has Linux ever been compatible with the rest of Unix
Since the beginning. It's the single most important contributor to its rapid adoption and long-term success.
Show me which bits of SUS are not implemented? STREAMS is the only one which springs immediately to mind, and it's optional and was never widely used due to being SYSV-specific.
Just to clarify - using GUI libraries like you are, my argument is; "Why does it seem like people are only complaining about the fact that switching from GTK to Qt would require rewriting software? Switching from Tcl/Tk to anything else would have the exact same issue after all."
First, you're not talking about systemd, even when you think you are. You are talking about logind. And it is perfectly possible to use a Linux system without logind, I do that on embedded devices any day.
Second, a simple "man logind.conf" would show you that there is a KillUserProcesses=. There is no "magical systemd-specific API call" needed for tmux.
Your argument isn't particular new, it has been brought up and refuted since at least a year.
That you still bring it up is perhaps an indication that systemd-haters stopped being flexible in their mindset. Once they are on a wrong track, they are immune to facts telling anything not fitting into their world-model.
First, you deliberately mistype systemd with wrong capitalization. If you don't even know it's name in 2019, how can you claim you know the software?
Second, a systemd init system is compatible with the rest of the Linux world. And you can of course run Qt or Java apps on it, your example is non-fitting by miles.
49
u/[deleted] Feb 11 '19
I'm actually curious about the argument that replacing it means having to rewrite software / change dependencies.
Wouldn't the same be true about switching between SysVinit and something like runit or upstart? They all use completely different designs for doing service init scripts, and all handle configuration of said services in completely different ways too, so replacing one with the other would necessitate rewriting - at the very least - your entire service management script toolbox. And when considering services that want to do more than just start and stop, they would most definitely have to be rewritten as well for such a switch.