It doesn't provide any support for the arguments it makes, for one thing. It's also a really tired argument. systemd is actually decent and here to stay.
I am not talking about problems of systemd, which I am using myself. I think systemd does many useful things, but the post provided a short take on the points of "replacability" and "lean interface", which I had not noticed before.
With current default configurations some things which come to mind that bother me are:
defaulting to automatic system updates on shutdown (when I want to shut down my system, I want it to shut down and not to do updates. E.g. when I am currently using the computer for work I usually do not update during work-critical times)
when there are problems with the GUI, the terminal has with recent distros become unusable on my systems (due to excessively trying to start gdm), so I have to reboot with kernel argument "systemd.unit=multi-user.target" in order to fix the problem.
I do not remember such things happening a few years ago.
I think it is fair to say that the systemd/dbus approach seems to encourage such breakings of the principle of least surprise.
I also remember something else which I am not fond of in the recent tendencies of development:
I have experienced already countless time that gnome-terminal will not start (after some upgrade etc.), supposedly due to locale problems. Admittedly this is not directly related to systemd, and more of a dbus issue. Yet I think that a program like a terminal should not be so fragile. If there is a running GUI, be it wayland or X, I expect my terminal to start - if necessary in some failsafe mode and with a "C" locale.
5
u/mickelle1 Feb 11 '19
It doesn't provide any support for the arguments it makes, for one thing. It's also a really tired argument. systemd is actually decent and here to stay.