Skip to main content ↑ ↓
Topic: Is avoiding systemd worth it (Read 2555 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Is avoiding systemd worth it

It appears most if not all Mainstream Distros™ use it. In theory it sounds suboptimal (in particular its hooks into UEFI sound overkill) but in practice it doesn't seem so bad; although I've heard a rumor systemd's true nature is to wall Linux off from BSD. This sounds like an ethical concern (but not bad enough to where I'll uproot my productivity).

Right now only non-systemd distro I know of that sounds easy to use is Artix, but I've also heard it's unstable? Right now I use Manjaro KDE, and to me it feels so expletive perfect I really don't want to switch unless I'm sure it's worth it. (I did hear Artix handles KDE Plasma with ease though.)

Has anyone tried Artix? Is it really a unique blend of Arch and Manjaro?

Re: Is avoiding systemd worth it

Reply #1 –
Quote from: marshallmathers – on
It appears most if not all Mainstream Distros™ use it. In theory it sounds suboptimal (in particular its hooks into UEFI sound overkill) but in practice it doesn't seem so bad; although I've heard a rumor systemd's true nature is to wall Linux off from BSD. This sounds like an ethical concern (but not bad enough to where I'll uproot my productivity).

Right now only non-systemd distro I know of that sounds easy to use is Artix, but I've also heard it's unstable? Right now I use Manjaro KDE, and to me it feels so expletive perfect I really don't want to switch unless I'm sure it's worth it. (I did hear Artix handles KDE Plasma with ease though.)

Has anyone tried Artix? Is it really a unique blend of Arch and Manjaro?
The problem of systemd is that it tries to be everything in your system not being an example of good code. There were already problems with dns which could just hang up system.
Personally, i don't like unit files, i prefer plain scripts which work as i want them to work.
Though i use Artix with testing repos it is far more stable for me than Manjaro ever was.
Artix is not a blend, it is separate distro.
ARMtix

Re: Is avoiding systemd worth it

Reply #2 –
That depends on you. Perhaps you should read this and decide for yourself: http://without-systemd.org/

I have been using this since when it was Arch/Manjaro without systemd, but it went its own way, it is no longer Manjaro based, just Arch without systemd.

Almost every other day there are news of security problems with systemd, and i have also experienced bugs with it. I also don't trust the author, he doesn't exactly have a track record for writing quality software, ignores bug reports, etc (i also removed pulseaudio and fail to see the usefulness of avahi).

In the end its your choice. We object the major distros way of imposing it, so decided to go our merry way instead.

Its all about choice...


The BSD thing makes no sense, Freebsd was also changing their init anyway.
I'm currently using sddm with XFCE, but KDE should work just fine. The usual fail is Gnome because of its heavy systemd "integration"...

If you prefer a "stable" (non rolling) distro, Devuan is Debian without systemd. There are several more in that url.

Re: Is avoiding systemd worth it

Reply #3 –
systemd sucks

Type that into google. Read why systemd sucks. If after reading you are unconvinced or unconcerned about the whole thing then stick with Arch / Manjaro. Otherwise switch to Artix. There aren't really any disadvantages to switching I can think of straight away unless you are are relying on some thing that has to have systemd. The best example I can think of is https://github.com/FeralInteractive/gamemode . I went to try it soon after Valve released Proton https://github.com/ValveSoftware/Proton and found it really does require systemd to work so never mind I won't use it. But everything else I use works fine without systemd.

Re: Is avoiding systemd worth it

Reply #4 –
Well you are posting on an anti-systemd distro's forum so what answer do you think you're likely to get? :P

Personally, all I want is an init and a process supervisor. The immense amount of complexity systemd adds has no benefit to me (or to most people honestly). I'm not interested in Lennart's vision of providing "core building blocks for an OS" (whatever that means). The init should just start up the system and then get out of the way. Process supervision should be clean and simple.

Also, the init system should not be hard to replace. For example on Artix you can pretty painlessly switch been openrc and runit. That's the way it should be. systemd is entrenched in everything a lot of packages end up having it a dependency for no real discernible reason (like Chromium depending on systemd on arch). The fact that you have to fork an entire distro to just get rid of systemd dependencies is insane. We aren't switching kernels here or switching C libraries. It's just the init.

Re: Is avoiding systemd worth it

Reply #7 –
Quote from: marshallmathers – on
It appears most if not all Mainstream Distros™ use it. In theory it sounds suboptimal (in particular its hooks into UEFI sound overkill) but in practice it doesn't seem so bad; although I've heard a rumor systemd's true nature is to wall Linux off from BSD. This sounds like an ethical concern (but not bad enough to where I'll uproot my productivity).

Right now only non-systemd distro I know of that sounds easy to use is Artix, but I've also heard it's unstable? Right now I use Manjaro KDE, and to me it feels so expletive perfect I really don't want to switch unless I'm sure it's worth it. (I did hear Artix handles KDE Plasma with ease though.)

Has anyone tried Artix? Is it really a unique blend of Arch and Manjaro?



Maybe this should be moved to another section?  It just seems to me that a thread that discusses the every value of Artix as a project would be better served in a section that is not "Package Management"