I'm new to Arch Linux, as of about 6 months ago, and I'm trying to understand why people dislike systemd? I pickup on people moaning about it, but I can't seem to find out why they don't like it specifically.
What are the other options which could be used instead of systemd?
Why is it so common if people are not happy with it?
Are there any security concerns on systems which run systemd?
There are areas where it's not configurable because its developers don't think it needs to be, similar to GNOME. The difference is that with GNOME, you can simply choose to use a different desktop environment; with systemd, it's much more difficult to find a good distribution not using it. For that reason, once you've been burned by non-configurable behavior in systemd, you recognize the problem that comes with giving one software project (and its one development team) exclusive control over so many different areas of the system.
I've never had a problem with systemd service management, but I've had a major problem with systemd-udevd's lack of configurability (combined with libinput's lack of configurability) making it impossible to load my Logitech wireless touchpad the way I want to. There's no way to use the touchpad without having a dead "palm rejection zone" around the entire perimeter of the device. From what I remember, libinput only allows reading the desired dead zone in from udevd, and udevd hard-codes the dead zone, meaning if I wanted to remove it, I'd have to patch and manually recompile systemd with every minor update, which is enough of an inconvenience that I just don't use the touchpad much.
I've seen others have issues configuring systemd-resolved (with or without systemd-networkd), and I've also seen plenty of interesting quirks in the systemd-boot bootloader's behavior. If these components were separated out, it would be feasible for alternatives with easier configuration to exist (see GRUB or rEFInd instead of systemd-boot.) Once people decide a systemd component is "good enough" to use by default, or it becomes too complicated to make an alternative, you can end up with subpar components as the only option available.
posted
posted
I've never had a problem with systemd service management, but I've had a major problem with systemd-udevd's lack of configurability (combined with libinput's lack of configurability) making it impossible to load my Logitech wireless touchpad the way I want to. There's no way to use the touchpad without having a dead "palm rejection zone" around the entire perimeter of the device. From what I remember, libinput only allows reading the desired dead zone in from udevd, and udevd hard-codes the dead zone, meaning if I wanted to remove it, I'd have to patch and manually recompile systemd with every minor update, which is enough of an inconvenience that I just don't use the touchpad much.
I've seen others have issues configuring systemd-resolved (with or without systemd-networkd), and I've also seen plenty of interesting quirks in the systemd-boot bootloader's behavior. If these components were separated out, it would be feasible for alternatives with easier configuration to exist (see GRUB or rEFInd instead of systemd-boot.) Once people decide a systemd component is "good enough" to use by default, or it becomes too complicated to make an alternative, you can end up with subpar components as the only option available.