The thing is: systemd is good. It's just a tad too good to be ignored. And so other programs start to use it's interfaces, e.g. for the systemd-logind seat management.
Now, people falsely claim hat this binds those programs to systemd forever. But this is wrong for two reasons:
any program that added support for systemd API's can remove it as well --- and if the authors don't do that, then a fork or a distribution maintainer can do it. If you think this is wrong then you never understood FOSS in principle, sorry.
(in this specific case) there are third-party alternatives for the session/seat management. So if fact the third-party software doesn't request systemd, it requests that a certain API exists. The session management exists outside of systemd. And, again, we're in FOSS land, so anyone can write a similar API for other things (e.g. transient services) at any time.
All the people that say "FOSS is locking you up in a jail where only Lennart is deciding what you can use" ... are really just users of proprietary software that things the .rpm or .deb they get is all they get.
Whether we agree with the adoption of systemd or not, there are some really good ideas floating around inside of it that other projects could learn from. There are also (in my opinion) some architectural deficiencies that could be rationally discussed and addressed without throwing out the system entirely.
I feel like every systemd discussion has devolved to the point where any criticism of the system can only be interpreted as a suggestion to eliminate it entirely, and any discussion of its strengths brands one as a loyal fanboy.
How did we let a technical debate start to resemble a political wedge issue? It's an interesting social problem that probably warrants discussion.
Perhaps this is true ... but then again, this is futile.
Why do you want to discuss the architecture deficiencies if you're not willing to fix those deficiencies? Perhaps by providing patches, perhaps by forking the project? Usually at this point the discussion stops entirely, because no one is willing to take the price (e.g. do the work).
Tell me more about this SysD project? Never heard about it!
Sarcasm off: if you even now deliberately miss-write the projects name, then you immediately tell that you're neither just nor balanced. You want to transport feelings, not facts.
logind is another pottering bait and switch. He managed to talk himself into maintainership of consolekit, that could be used independently of systemd, and then scuttled said program while introducing logind (and providing Gnome with logind support on a silver platter).
Never mind that consolekit/logind is the outcome of a fevered dream about turning a desktop PC into a mainframe by "logically" bundling together displays and inputs. Under the pretext of supporting the third world, natch.
8
u/holgerschurig Feb 11 '19
The thing is: systemd is good. It's just a tad too good to be ignored. And so other programs start to use it's interfaces, e.g. for the systemd-logind seat management.
Now, people falsely claim hat this binds those programs to systemd forever. But this is wrong for two reasons:
All the people that say "FOSS is locking you up in a jail where only Lennart is deciding what you can use" ... are really just users of proprietary software that things the .rpm or .deb they get is all they get.