Comments by "Lawrence D’Oliveiro" (@lawrencedoliveiro9104) on "Init Freedom Campaign Saves Linux From Systemd?" video.

  1. The whole “Unix philosophy” bit is such a red herring. The example small components they mention invariably depend on much larger monolithic components underneath (e.g. the shell, the kernel, the X server). But they never want to mention that. Similarly, systemd may be a large piece of software, but it also lets you write small components -- service files can be very small.
    2
  2. The whole “Unix philosophy” bit is such a red herring. The example small components they mention invariably depend on much larger monolithic components underneath (e.g. the shell, the kernel, the X server). But they never want to mention that. Similarly, systemd may be a large piece of software, but it also lets you write small components -- service files can be very small.
    2
  3. Fun fact: none of the official standard specs for “Unix” say anything about init systems. That’s why, for example, Apple’s MacOS can run its own proprietary launchd and still be officially called “Unix”.
    2
  4. Gues what: those systemd config files let you run any number of external binaries. That’s what makes them so easy to set up.
    1
  5. There are some other pieces of open-source software that are Linux-only, e.g. Asterisk, Docker. Even WireGuard for FreeBSD had its hiccups. I expect this list will only grow over time.
    1
  6. If you write server code, creating systemd service files to control them is easier than for any other init system.
    1