I use plasma, BTW

    • uranibaba@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only arguments against I have seen so for is systemd does a lot more than just handing system startup (systemd-resolved is one such example) and files that was previously stored as text now require systemd’s own tool to read (journalctl?).

      So not the actual startup function, just everything else.

      • Dave.@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Mmm I have a general dislike of systemd because it doesn’t adhere to the “do one thing and do it well” approach of traditional Unix systems.

        It’s a big old opaque blob of software components that work nicely together but don’t play well with others, basically.

        Edit: but it solved a particular set of problems in serverspace and it’s bled over to the consumer Linux side of things and generally I’m ok with it if it simplifies things for people. I just don’t want a monoculture to spring up and take root across all of Linux as monocultures aren’t great for innovation or security.

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Based on the video someone posted, it’s not very portable either.

        I feel that little part of my brain that wants to add yet another standard itching. Easily starting something at boot is good, but I don’t see why that has to come with loss of modularity.

        • jbk@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Afaik they don’t care about being portable to instead focus as much as possible on being fast and whatever