I have seen so many times that systemd is insecure, bloated, etc. So i wonder ¿does it worth to switch to another init system?

  • kadu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    The complaints about systemd aren’t actual issues, but rather people with the flexibility of a concrete wall trying to hold on to the way they did things over two decades ago.

    • dsemy@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I didn’t use Linux two decades ago (I started on a systemd distro a few years ago), and the init system I use (runit on Void) is both simple to use and boots faster than any systemd-based distro I used; which is what I personally care about. I never used any “advanced” features of systemd other than timers and user services, and these have many alternatives.

      I think systemd is fine, and has generally proven itself as reliable, but that doesn’t mean the current alternatives have no merit.

      • frazorth@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I would be interested in understanding how it boots faster considering that systemd init is fairly small and the features of runit is parallel process starting, which is also something that systemd provides.

        Are you sure it’s not just that void itself has less crap to load?

        This feels like I’m going to have to set up a couple of Arch installs to compare for myself.