[arch-general] When will Arch switch to Systemd

Lukáš Jirkovský l.jirkovsky at gmail.com
Fri Jan 21 08:43:55 EST 2011

I think systemd is too much complicated and thus error prone. And so
does SysV init. In terms of reliability it should be as simple as
possible. What I really like is the the idea of runsv [1] – the init
itself does almost nothing. Even the simple things like respawning of
the processes are handled by external daemons. This is what I call
unix way and what I think is the most future proof (what if D-Bus
become obsolete etc etc).

And as other people said – I'm afraid of systemd even more because it
was written by the same person as Pulse Audio was. PA didn't work very
well for quite a long time. I'm not going to argue about that (it's
just my personal opinion and none of you will change it), but I just
don't believe someone who wrote a piece of crap which took several
years to become generally usable will suddenly write something so
delightful so it can be used as a replacement of one of the most
tested and most established things in Unix/Linux world.

[1] http://busybox.net/~vda/init_vs_runsv.html

More information about the arch-general mailing list