Reply to post:

Linux greybeards release beta of systemd-free Debian fork

jerky_rs

personally i think SystemD is overally complicated for what it achieves, sure it boots faster but on a server all i care about is that it comes up and things are simple. With Systemd there is no clear detail of how and what starts unless you reverse targets out of the systemd directory which is ridiculous as compared to "chkconfig --list | grep 3:on" . If we really needed something to start up different processes and manage(and dependencies) them in a simple way they should have just used SupervisorD and include files. Sadly SystemD is much more then what it needs to be.

This is another great example of why systemd is not very good

tcp6 0 0 :::9090 :::* LISTEN 1/systemd

Err so something with PID 1 is listening on 9090, wonder what that is? Start fgrep your systemd directory and hopefully it returns something with 9090 (happens to be cockpit socket..)

As an RHCE for over 10 years i think this is the biggest mistake Redhat has ever made, but i guess we must learn to love systemd. Its in my opinion as bad or worse then firewalld or networmanager both of which have no business being on a server. (desktop sure why not).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019