Tell me the non-meme reason why Systemd is """bad""", and why alternatives such as Sysvinit are better

It's just to ward off "MuH bOtNeT"-tier posts. I have no stake in systemd's perception.

It tries to do too many things, it doesn't follow the classic Unix philosophy (do one thing and do it well) and it had many vulnerabilities in the past because of the shit implementation of its init system, which is one of the most crucial part of an operating system.
One of the many things that it shouldn't do but does it anyway, managing logins using logind, is literally causing apps (like GNOME and KDE) to have a hard dependency on systemd, meaning that it won't work on non-systemd systems.
Notice how I said "its init system" because systemd is not just an init system anymore, it's trying to do literally everything including handling DNS, logins and booting.

I do not give a literal indivisible unit of fuck about UNIX the dead 1960s OS. let it die.
the problem i care about is that redhat wants to fill the void with stuff they control that only they can maintain so they can sell linux as a service.

It even handles the fucking syslog using journald, what an absolute joke.

It's one of the "Embrace, Extend, Extinguish"-style projects, it took somethings (like init, logind, DNS, logging, etc) and embraced them, then slowly extended their functionality and then fucked every non-systemd system by breaking compatibility with alternative solutions like consolekit and syslogd. This is literally the shit that Microsoft did in the past and many Linux users got butthurt about, yet it's okay when Linux users do it.
It's a corporate dystopia and it needs to be stopped.

have sex.

There's nothing wrong with systemd. People hate it because it's new and different, and that scares them. Hating systemd is as irrational as hating 5G.

>just let that red hot corporate takeover cock go right in the ass. yeah take it boi

Comparing anti-5G shills to anti-systemd people is like comparing anti-vaxxers to anti-climate change activists.

it's just too new

It's open source software. Lennart isn't exerting his influence by being monopolistic or proprietary. The reason he's having an impact is because he writes a ton of code.

If you don't like what he's doing, you can fight it by writing a ton of code yourself and taking things in the direction you want. If you don't want to do any work, then guess what, you don't get a seat at the table.

It's not cool to try and tear him down and prevent people from making changes. That stifles innovation.

I've heard some good arguments from people who manage systems and like comfy work. Some people have started likening it to a service manager, and I agree with it on that end. However. You've got the motherfuckers that maintain it, which are a group of pseudo-intellectuals, and you've got the way it and free desktop have plugged it into existing distros. Both of these things suck ass. Now if redhat was maintaining systemd for use on redhat platforms, then by all means. I also want to point out that because a lot of the younger people out there using linux have never used a system without systemd, they can accept it, and all the positives outweigh the negative. I really hate the pamd and X11 side of systemd. they drive me fucking insane

Its about choice and flexabilty, haveing systemd burrow its way into software and become a hard dependency is annoying and makes porting said software to other architectures and operating systems nigh impossible at times(see GNOME prior to elogind).

the real problem isn't pottering making a shitload unmaintainable buggy code it's that redhat is funding that so that no one else in the ecosystem can compete. they are out-resourcing the home grown alternatives.

Thankfully the shear amount of autism at the gentoo foundation keeps openrc in the running. For me atleast, im loving it.

>It's open source software. Lennart isn't exerting his influence by being monopolistic or proprietary. The reason he's having an impact is because he writes a ton of code.
It would be fine if it was like that, but that's not how it is. Read these replies:
----
No, the real problem is systemd breaking apps on non-systemd systems.

>buggy code
The reason he wrote systemd is because old style init scripts were a constant source of bugs. For decades people blamed daemon authors and distro maintainers for writing these buggy init scripts. Sure it's not technically sysvinit's fault, because it left the details to each individual servie.

Lennart saw that realistically, the situation was never going to improve unless the init system took over daemonizing, child process tracking, and all the other stuff that never worked right before. He solved these problems once and for all in systemd so that individual daemon/service developers don't need to do it themselves. It's great if you want to write your own service.

I don't know how bad is SystemD.
I just know that I've been using runit for two years and I never had an init/service management related issue.

SystemD is now 1.5 million lines of code. OpenBSD’s kernel, full userland, c compiler, and X is 1.2 million lines.

I mean, its in the tree, but its basically legacy at this point.

just runit bro

systemd is the most bloated piece of software I've ever seen.
Couldn't they write a fucking init system with a few lines of C and be done with it?
Thankfully I tried *BSD and never looked back.

being anti-climate change is nothing less than complete denial of reality