Linux

Hmm? Unless you're trying to run the most recent build of Gnome, the set of software that actually requires systemd is pretty small. There's a list somewhere on the Gentoo wiki. What exactly are you having problems with?

In a way it was a brilliant plot by the "elites".

In the late 90s and early 2000s, in the time of the open web, with independent free operating systems on the rise the ruling elite of billionaires and their pet governments saw the very real risk of losing control over the masses. Just imagine: Everybody from young Timmy to Grandma Esther could learn (and was encouraged! I fondly remember an HTML course in an "old people newspaper" my grandpa read) to learn programming, build their own website connect and speak their mind on a net was completely uncontrolled by states. No algorithms that burrow your tweet, no way to 'cancel' unwelcome opinions. And the same was true if you used free software: The ability to - at least in theory - look at the sourcecode of the tools you use, check for backdoors and make changes and even recompile everything afterwards is extremely dangerous to authorities.

They followed the good old "embrace extend extinguish" playbook. Give people ways that are seemingly more accessible and easy to publish online - no need for writing HTML! - push those services and let people forget what empowerment they had. No, they didn't ban private websites... they just taught people to stop creating or looking for them. On the free operating system front they first donated to some key projects, give people prominent in the community well paying jobs, let them work on open source projects in their work time... openly endorse specific open source projects and steer the community slowly, very slowly into a direction where key elements become more and more complex. Too complex for a single person or a small team to fully understand or maintain. Now you need more infrastructure, more manpower, more funding. And who has the funding? Just guess...

The next step is to make the software that the user needs more controllable. Just remember: Not that long ago you could walk into a computer store, buy a Floppy / CD / DVD with software and install and use it as long as you had a physical copy of it. No online activation, no accounts, no way to remotely disable it. With ever more stuff moving from installed software on your computer to services running online, with the rising need to have some form of subscription and account to simply use the software they regained control.

Now they are coming for the open source applications. With ever more Linux programs being dependent on Systemd and with corporations having control over the development thereof it will get harder to port this software over to other systems (say BSDs) or even Linux systems not running Systemd. With the upcoming age-verification laws all over the world this has... nasty implications.

If you couple all of the above with the already compromised hardware we all are using we are approaching truly dystopic territories: Do you think you really have control over your computer? Well, if so, i would suggest researching what theoretical can be done with the nice combo of the Intel Management Engine (or its equivalents), AMT and TPM...

Perhaps i am just an tinfoil hat wearing paranoiac, but the state of the digital world in the year of our lord 2026 is something i would not have envisioned in my darkest nightmares from 30 years ago.

As someone who has had to use plenty of different init systems before: Systemd is really good and it's widely adopted because it's really good.

I've considered being mad about the userdb thing but it's not even running on any of my machines and I didn't even make an effort to remove it.

I feel like there's a fair criticism here as much as one might disagree with the framing, with the criticism probably most properly directed at the corporate-backed distributions and the structure of FOSS funding.

Like, yeah, IBM and the like don't owe the remaining ecosystem anything, but if FOSS had less capitalism focused funding then there might be more focus on not throwing so many resources at a single init system that feature-wise seems to be questionably enterprise-focused. (Let's face it, most average home users don't need 90% of what systemd can do, and would occasionally benefit from alternative options. It's also in the spirit of FOSS to retain more nimble alternatives, so that contributions are easier.)

So I feel like the comments pointing out that nobody needs to use it, have a point but meanwhile perhaps they're missing that there is still some legit ecosystem worry to be had.

Becoming? I think you're at least 10 years too late for present continuous.

This shit again?

this doesn’t go with the idea of Linux, which is having “freedom” with your os, picking and choosing what goes on and off while still being usable.

No. That's not the "idea of Linux". That's your idea of Linux. I don't see people bitching about the heavy reliance on the GNU toolchain.

this doesn’t go with the idea of Linux, which is having “freedom” with your os

Err... it's "freedom" as in "you are free to run your own system using whatever software you wish" not "freedom" as in "distros and devs have a duty to support your freedom to run any specific software you happen to like".

Let's turn down the entitlement dial a bit.

2014 called. It wants its controversy back.

It's Open Source. Nobody needs to use it, and it's especially not all-inclusive. That being said, it's also not new at all as it's been around in most distros for well over a decade. It has its pros and cons like anything.

Your assumption that "freedom" has something to do with Linux writ large is misguided though. You have distros that have communal decision making, and if they find a benefit to systemd, then they'll use systemd. Don't use that distro if you don't like it. There's your freedom of choice.

That ship has sailed. Systemd isn't going anywhere. The upside is you can run a distro that uses an alternative init if you want. There's runit, sysV, and openrc that I can think of off the top of my head.

You dont have to like, or use systemd. That's the beauty of Linux.

I feel this but with libadwaita apps. Stick out like a sore thumb, can't theme them, and many aren't even GNOME's own core apps.

Idk. about the Linux idea and the freedom being at risk.

You’ve chosen another init system, they’ve chosen theirs -hopefully- for technical reasons.

As far as I see your choice and freedom is not constrained. You are free to mix and build whatever suits your needs.

It's not just init; why þe fuck does yay (Arch) now depend on systemd? It's worked fine for years wiþout a systemd dependency, but now it can't be used on e.eg Artix. It's stupid, and it has forced me to switch to a different pacman wrapper, which is messing wiþ my muscle memory... for no god damned good reason.

Kinda curious what applications give you trouble without systemd? I ran Void linux for like 2 years and now i'm on Guix, and never really had issues with applications because of systemd not being present.

this can't be true! i was told that there was no controversy over systemd co-option of the inits!!! lol

my only gripe is that it does too much; more than an init system should be doing and i got to experience this first hand when i had to add a bunch of containers to systemd to use them.