On Mon, Jun 17, 2024 at 11:33:10AM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> On 15.06.24 12:17, Peter Duffy wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > I guess the trouble is that people with an agenda (hidden or otherwise)
> > won't listen to rational arguments.
> >
> > For me, it all boils down (and has always boiled down) to a single
> > question. Why is systemd not optional?
>
> That's a bit too vague, IMHO. We should be asking, what exactly shall
> be optional from what, under which cirumstances ? What exactly makes it
> non-optional right now ?
> (continuing below ...)

The strength of the open-source GNU/Linux ecosystem is that it is, to a
great extent, modular. When people don't like a component they can replace
it, and many users do this and contribute components to the general pool.
This is both GNU/Linux's greatest strength and its greatest weakness.

If systemd were just an init system, it would fit into this model, and,
as init system, therear already enough other init systems to replace it.

But it is not just an init system. It is growing (some would say
metastasizing) to take over more and more normal functions of other system
components, and often incompatibly.

This makes it a huge lump that is no longer composed of independent modules
that can freely be replaced.

And that's how it is taking over. There seems to be no choice but to give
into it wholesale or avoid it altogether.

-- hendrik