sorted by controversial and found this post. why? this is amazing

cool article

which makes me wonder why there are people who still avoid systemd. i get that alpine can't use glibc, but what about everyone else? i just see vague statements about systemd being "too big" or going "against unix philosophy", but never concrete disadvantages of systemd compared to other pid-1s

edit: also, i wonder how viable would it be to port systemd to musl or whatever alpine uses so that they can take advantage of it

we all have our most wanted missing features but if i'm being honest i don't see how session saving should take priority over e.g. rendering protocols

not a wayland dev but: patches welcome

that's fucking scummy. he really hates mastodon admins having agency over their own servers

"this week in plasma: core plasma shell rewritten in typescript and electron"

systemd is a system daemon, not an init system

also, why should applications avoid depending on useful features?

i don't know much about openrc, but doesn't it use sysvinit? one of the major advantages of systemd is ditching sysvinit

he's joking

at least this guy recognizes systemd isn't (just) an init system

"it attempts to do more" yeah. that's the point. that's a good thing. a single source of truth for system background services. background systems used to be a fucking mess and then systemd fixed it. this is why it is the de facto pid 1

i wish people just quit whining

please do not use debian testing. it is not fit for production use and will give you headaches, especially when a new release starts approaching

vbox is easy. qemu is kinda frustrating to use sometimes, although virt-manager makes it a little easier