this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2024
78 points (92.4% liked)

Linux

5188 readers
145 users here now

A community for everything relating to the linux operating system

Also check out !linux_memes@programming.dev

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] bitfucker@programming.dev 7 points 6 months ago (10 children)

From what I've read, wouldn't this tool become a replacement in the same way wayland replace x11 (different method of escalation and all)? I guess what I was thinking is more like a sudo alternative, like doas for example. In any case, would change like this break a lot of workflow? If so, I doubt it will be the replacement soon.

[–] sxan@midwest.social 16 points 6 months ago (9 children)

systemd is the opposite of Wayland.

Wayland took a monolithic system (Xorg) and broke it apart (Wayland, compositors) to try to make a smaller, cleaner codebase with separation of concerns.

systemd took an already separated system of discrete, interchangeable components and, like a katamari, rolls along absorbing services and clumping them together into one giant monolithic system. It started out as a replacement for init.d, and then decided it needed to absorb syslog, and then crond, and then mounting /home, and now it wants sudo.

systemd is the "see:" in the definition of "feature envy." Of you look up the "the Unix philosophy", systemd is the exact opposite; people who oppose systemd don't do it for no reason; they oppose it because it violates every tenant of the Unix philosophy.

I would guess the Wayland people would be aghast at the comparison.

[–] epat@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago (7 children)

Systemd is not really an one giant monolith, it's a set of smaller tools

[–] saiarcot895@programming.dev 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

It's a set of smaller tools that are developed in the same repository and all released together, all sharing some amount of code.

That basically makes it monolithic, even if there's separate binaries that the user calls.

[–] pressanykeynow@lemmy.world 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Doesn't you description make Linux monolithic?

[–] saiarcot895@programming.dev 1 points 6 months ago

You mean the Linux kernel specifically? I think most people do regard it as a monolithic kernel, even if there are modules you can load and unload.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)