Linux

65502 readers

430 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 7 years ago

MODERATORS

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

-5

systemd being mainstream is alarming and goes against the philosophy of linux (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) by OppressedBread@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml

112 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I know I'm not the only one that said this but I really can't stand how systemd is becoming "the norm" init system for every major distro, this is bad.

it is especially bad when certain apps are built specifically for systemd, locking users behind a specific init system and compatibility issues spark because you don't use a mainstream one , this doesn't go with the idea of Linux, which is having "freedom" with your os, picking and choosing what goes on and off while still being usable.

I switched to artix Linux with openRC a while ago the moment systemd added code for potential age verification, they called it malicious compliance but I really didn't like the smell of that, now I'm fighting tooth and nail with some applications because they're systemd dependent, resulting in me creating custom scripts to mitigate their issues.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] acido@feddit.it 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

what is the difference between the adoption of systemd and that of X or Wayland?

aren't those equally "mainstream" and don't they also leave almost no chance to have an alternative (especially for the average user)?

this is a genuine question because, while I know and understand the sentiment against systemd, I realized just now that in the 20 years I've been on Linux many things I've used were kinda against "freedom".

[–] strawberry_enjoyer42@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

AFAIK, neither X nor Wayland have ties to tech giants. Possibly more practically, X and Wayland both fulfil one purpose/need, whereas Systemd has some scope-creep going on, which feels a tad intentional.

[–] acido@feddit.it 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I see.

the tech giant you mean is IBM I imagine?

[–] strawberry_enjoyer42@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago

Yeah, I mean IBM. It had and has ties to not-so-great governments, and I just can't trust it.