Potentially this means that Fedora and CentOS stream do not get timely updates implemented in RHEL.

Canonical must be throwing a party, and I bet SUSE is not hating it either

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 3 years ago (2 children)
  • [–] 22 points 3 years ago

    Debian has always had a primary focus on being open source and adhering to good open source principles. It's a rare trait in the modern Linux ecosystem sadly, with so many corporate distros just trying to make a buck. Arch seems pretty good about open principles as well. I'm always going to stick to community-powered distros over ones backed by corporations and I suggest everyone who cares about FOSS do the same.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -15 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    It was until they shipped systemd. Bloody mess.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    systemd is one of the best things that has happened with linux. Instead of random shell scripts that work differently on each distro, now you have a single ini conf file for your service that configures automatic restarts, sandboxing and activation in a easy to use way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    I'm so confused as to why people hate systemd.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 years ago*

    I mean a core issue is that it doesn't adhere to the unix principle of do one thing and do it well. Aside from that it essentially creates a middle layer where things can happen without you really knowing it's happening. If you haven't I'd suggest running a couple of different init systems to see what I mean.

    I'm ambivalent, I like systemd because it's convenient, but I also like openrc because it's simple.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago

    I don't like systemd. Reasons:

    • broad scope and lots of dependencies are more or less the exact opposite design philosophy of *nix

    • putting too many eggs in one basket intrinsically increases the attack vector and also decreases stability

    • bloated

    Most importantly:

    • Gives Red Hat i.e. IBM too much influence over Linux
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    A specific design philosophy that is adhered to means the software has greater interoperability, reliability, and maintainability. When you are criticising something that adheres to a design philosophy, communicate how it's adhering to that philosophy to it's own detriment.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    They see all the other stuff that gets packaged under the systemd name and assume it's non-optional. While many distributions do, annoyingly, ship the auxiliary packages like resolved by default, they're not required if you just want to use the init system, and honestly they kind of strike me as an attempt to supplement or replace some of the incumbent components of your average distro.

    Systemd-resolved can suck my whole grundle, though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    APT is the mess, I've never had more issues with broken packages and unbreakable dependency cycles than with APT

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments