The apathy here is part of the problem. I’m absolutely sick of people breaking fundamental parts of Linux and then saying “whatever” when those of us who deal with massive production systems complain. Isn’t part of this whole open/free thing supposed to be that a conversation with interested parties is supposed to be valued?
The biggest problem is that sysvinit was not broken for servers. I understand that for laptop cases it seemed to folks like sabdfl that we needed to innovate to get sub second boot so that we could win the desktop. Turns out, once suspend/resume is fixed, that fast boot becomes useless.
But why would I care? Wouldn’t a more ‘modern’ design be OK too? Sure. If it worked. But it doesn’t. It’s buggy and complex and striving to be … Interesting. I agree, this SHOULD be an uninteresting space. But systemd, like upstart, tries to make it interesting. And that means that now sometimes my Linux server is going to break in new and exciting ways and I’ll have to … REBOOT it to fix it.
Really? We want to catch up with “have you tried turning it off and on?”??!?!?!?!!!?!!
In any case, systemd is trying to solve a problem that does not exist. But the fact that the distros have become so divorced from the reality that folks running systems live in is the real problem, and their adoption of systemd is merely a symptom of their myopic insanity.
I hear it may be time to try gentoo … Sigh. I’d really like to NOT be forced to deal with this.