The systemd law
systemd is somewhat of a controversial topic in the Linux ecosystem. This init system for Linux distributions is loved and hated by many people, and people never seem to stop complaining about it. Meanwhile, Linux distros are slowly adopting
systemd to the point of scaring the hard-line
systemd detractors into creating their own spin-off of their favourite distro with
systemd violently ripped apart from it.
I love how a discourse always breaks out on any tech-related group chat I’m in as soon as someone mentions
systemd. I agree that
systemd might be the best thing to come out of the Linux ecosystem since sliced bread. I also agree that
systemd includes numerous oddities, quirks, and stupidities in its codebase. However, I’d argue that as stupid as
systemd does its job, some of its quirks serve some purpose, and the people who maintain the distros adopting
systemd felt it was an advantage to use it.
There are many people who bemoan and bitch about
systemd simply because it’s the Hip Thing™ to do. Simply complaining because of its existence, and wishing that it would vanish off the face of the earth. Yet still, they never funneled all that wasted energy into making the init ecosystem great again1 and either improve
systemd, give constructive feedback to its development, or, if they have the time, develop an init system that takes the good ideas of
systemd as well as throwing out its bad bits.
This kind of negativity is always bad, especially for open-source software maintainers. First of all, it’s funny, and also sad, seeing how many people complain about free stuff (this software is provided “as-is”, no warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, etc etc.), and secondly, as long as people keep on complaining on systemd without offering a viable alternative, it’s here to stay.
systemd is the Linux equivalent of Godwin’s Law.
In which case, I propose the
As a Linux-related internet discussion grows longer, the probability of a discourse involving
I had to do it, sorry. ↩