> for some of us it's articles like this on HN which give an opportunity to talk about systemd without being off topic.
I would argue it is off topic because it's barely relevant to the submitted link. Just post "Tell HN: systemd sucks" and you can talk systemd all day long.
You could even include some actually real and concrete concerns, like trying to bloat the kernel with some linux-on-teh-desktopz IPC which will probably be replaced by the next big thing by 2025, bundling some weird syslog replacement, bundling a half-assed DNS cache (it was originally vulnerable to spoofed answers right off the bat, besides the recent remote code execution oopsie), polluting dmesg with systemd log messages, asking the kernel to workaround systemd crashing when the kernel is booted with debug output, Poettering's dismissal of the UEFI bricking fiasco, the recent failure to drop privileges on usernames starting with 0, ...
You guys behave as if some overblown pretext were needed to flame systemd :p
I would argue it is off topic because it's barely relevant to the submitted link. Just post "Tell HN: systemd sucks" and you can talk systemd all day long.
You could even include some actually real and concrete concerns, like trying to bloat the kernel with some linux-on-teh-desktopz IPC which will probably be replaced by the next big thing by 2025, bundling some weird syslog replacement, bundling a half-assed DNS cache (it was originally vulnerable to spoofed answers right off the bat, besides the recent remote code execution oopsie), polluting dmesg with systemd log messages, asking the kernel to workaround systemd crashing when the kernel is booted with debug output, Poettering's dismissal of the UEFI bricking fiasco, the recent failure to drop privileges on usernames starting with 0, ...
You guys behave as if some overblown pretext were needed to flame systemd :p