Because of the ubiquity, nay, monopoly of systemd I always assumed it was miles ahead of other init systems. Nope. I’ve been using a non-systemd environment for a while and must say I’m surprised by how little breaks, i.e., next to nothing. Moreover, boot and shutdown times are faster, and more of that good stuff. I suggest trying it out.

https://nosystemd.org/.

  • greyscale@lemmy.grey.oooEnglish
    3·
    11 hours ago

    its the default, its the default everywhere, nobody is changing that configuration because systemd is a massive blob of nonsense.

    Why is it the default?

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      3·
      11 hours ago

      Because most people prefer it. Again: having a minority taste doesn’t mean you’re oppressed when there’s an option to have what you want.

      • greyscale@lemmy.grey.oooEnglish
        3·
        11 hours ago

        I don’t remember anyone -asking- for systemd, I just remember being subjected to it at the time it started getting popular.

        If systemd is the solution, I want my problem back.

        • marmalade@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          1·
          50 minutes ago

          That’s because you very clearly had nothing to do with developing or maintaining Linux distros. You’re just a user with an ego problem. There are plenty of explanations that exist now and then to explain why systemd was desirable, and why it ended up in basically every major Linux distro, including Arch and Debian, both of which are not corporate, but community developed.