Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.
systemd cat and GNU cat hugging a Linux cat.
As a user, why should I care whether the distro I use uses systemd? I use Mint and I don't remember having to interact with that kind of low-level nonsense. The distro maintainers can use whatever reasoning they want to pick these details.
As a user, why should I care whether the distro I use uses systemd?
Um, because as a user you may have to deal with services, or other systemd features?
Let's say you want to start ssh-agent when you login to your desktop environment. Well, there's a systemd service for that that you can enable, and on another distro you'd have to do it another way (autostart script or something).
Tribalism exists in every circle, perhaps moreso in tech circles. Ironically anyone who hates on a distro could just switch, or build their own distro if they were so inclined, but it's often the hating that people participate more in than using their system. Use what works for you, and if it no longer works for you use something else.
If you are just a user, in that a computer is just a tool you use, then you're right, there's comparatively little reason to be concerened or even know about the underlying details of the system. If you go further and start making changes to your system, or even building more complex systems, over time you will find yourself forming quite firm opinions about various parts of the underlying system, especially if you've had experience with other options.
System service managers like systemd, OpenRC, runit, or SysVinit often come down to user preference. While these systems are crucial for initializing and managing services on servers, where uptime, resource allocation, and specific daemon behaviors are important, their impact on a typical desktop or laptop is generally minimal.
For most personal devices, the primary functions of a service manager occur largely out of sight. As long as the system boots reliably and applications run smoothly, the underlying service manager rarely registers as a significant factor in the daily user experience.
For many, including myself, systemd simply works without much fuss. My choice to stick with it isn't due to strong conviction or deep technical analysis, but rather the simple fact that I've rarely, if ever, had to interact with it directly. For my personal desktop and laptop, it reliably handles booting, service management, and shutdown in the background. If it's not broken and isn't hindering my daily computing, there's no compelling reason to explore alternatives.
System service managers like systemd, OpenRC, runit, or SysVinit often come down to user preference.
And coding best-practice. And a philosophy borne of bad luck and bad software that aims to resist monoculture.
But that lennart kid is cool for a Microsoft employee.
Artix is an under-appreciated gem.
Void Linux, although I use NixOS nowadays.
Void, because it works really well on my super low-resource chromebook!
Kolibri, which only needs a handful of RAM and disk space
PalmOS. So simplistic yet powerful. I miss those old PDAs :(
There was a lack of sinisterness to the PalmOS ecosystem that we've lost.
I misread and wondered when did systemd release cat as in the software not the animal.
Offtopic, but... Another ANeko user :D
Alpine Linux would be my favourite, although I only use it as a server distro. I use Artix as my daily driver for personal computers because of the AUR and glibc (Alpine is musl). I also enjoy Void but it's not got as much software as Artix repos + AUR.
Alpine.
Have used crux but using low end / old hardware results in almost permanent building software.
I like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Alpine, and Devuan.
I don't care about the init system, however i do love void mainly because of the package manager.
Normie here, what's wrong with systemd?
Some people think it handles too many low-level systems. It's a valid concern because if systemd itself were to become compromised (like Xz Utils was) or a serious bug was introduced, all of the userland processes would be affected. People who are stuck in the 90s and think that the Unix philosophy is still relevant will also point out that it's a needlessly complex software suite and we should all go back to writing initscripts in bash.
Red Hat, the owner of systemd, has also had its fair share of controversies. It's a company that many distrust.
Ultimately, those whose opinion mattered the most decided that systemd's benefits outweigh the risks and drawbacks. Debian held a vote to determine the project's future regarding init systems. Arch Linux replaced initscripts because systemd was simply better, and replicating and maintaining its features (like starting services once their dependencies are running) with initscripts would've been unjustifiably complicated.