Oh I’m sure there was valid critique, but at the time it was completely hidden under a pile of made-up conspiracy bullshit about red hat being the devil or so, or plain wrong assertions like “it’s monolithic” or “it forces you to use binary logging”.
If the debate would have been about technical merits, maybe one of the other init systems would have won by being slightly better, but systemd’s detractors prevented that really well by making the public “debate” a compete farce.
Wayland has to overcome more real problems than systemd (because X11 was a giant monolith of compatibility hacks that everybody used, as opposed to a hundred piles of messy shell scripts that was SYSV init). But it has no alternatives that could possibly have more technical merit; I can’t even remember the thing Ubuntu announced for a hot minute.
Oh I’m sure there was valid critique, but at the time it was completely hidden under a pile of made-up conspiracy bullshit about red hat being the devil or so, or plain wrong assertions like “it’s monolithic” or “it forces you to use binary logging”.
If the debate would have been about technical merits, maybe one of the other init systems would have won by being slightly better, but systemd’s detractors prevented that really well by making the public “debate” a compete farce.
Wayland has to overcome more real problems than systemd (because X11 was a giant monolith of compatibility hacks that everybody used, as opposed to a hundred piles of messy shell scripts that was SYSV init). But it has no alternatives that could possibly have more technical merit; I can’t even remember the thing Ubuntu announced for a hot minute.