The quality of this list feels greatly diminished by the very first bit about "no systemd?"
It was good to question systemd, but given its performance, transparency, and general ability to mostly stay out of the way, I wouldn't bring it up re: "minimalism," in the way the rest of the list is pretty minimalist.
Agreed, this feels like someone put an argument about tabs vs spaces at the top of the description for an editor. Like yes, you will have to choose whether to use systemd, but the argument for or against systemd doesn't feel like it belongs here in a list of 'minimalist user space programs/services'. From my perspective the only lens you can view this through that's even closely related is that systemd doesn't follow the Unix philosophy of 'do one thing and do it well', but that's not exactly an argument for or against minimalism. I'd argue that almost everything systemd brings to the table in a default setup are all things you'd need anyway, minimalist or otherwise. They're just all handled by one overarching service, which I think is the real argument against systemd.
Well, they link to suckless for reasons why systemd is bad. So they most likely have no idea what they are talking about as suckless is known for being mostly factually incorrect.
For example, suckless claims "pid 1 does DNS" and link to https://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/NEWS?id=2d... to prove this. That NEWS entry is about software not part of pid 1, but I guess reading is incompatible with a minimalist approach.
It is a low quality outdated list, but systemd should be on top of any minimalist list. It is the most violating Linux software of KISS/UNIX principle. So if anything putting it on top does validate the list.
Systemd is really bad and if you have a list listing minimalist stuff everything that uses it should be excluded. Having it at the top is a good thing.
Yes, systemd stays out of the way of most users since most users interact with it in exactly two ways starting/stopping and enabling/disabling services. Every other init system has a near identical API for those two things.
This does not expose the user to the underlying insanity and the web of nonsense when you actually have to "develop" for systemd.
Having to do mostly that for a living made me hate my job and significantly pushed me towards quitting, which I eventually did. Yes, it is that bad. Avoid it.
[+] [-] jrm4|1 year ago|reply
It was good to question systemd, but given its performance, transparency, and general ability to mostly stay out of the way, I wouldn't bring it up re: "minimalism," in the way the rest of the list is pretty minimalist.
[+] [-] Ethee|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway7356|1 year ago|reply
For example, suckless claims "pid 1 does DNS" and link to https://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/NEWS?id=2d... to prove this. That NEWS entry is about software not part of pid 1, but I guess reading is incompatible with a minimalist approach.
[+] [-] mrd3v0|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] microbass|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] constantcrying|1 year ago|reply
Yes, systemd stays out of the way of most users since most users interact with it in exactly two ways starting/stopping and enabling/disabling services. Every other init system has a near identical API for those two things.
This does not expose the user to the underlying insanity and the web of nonsense when you actually have to "develop" for systemd. Having to do mostly that for a living made me hate my job and significantly pushed me towards quitting, which I eventually did. Yes, it is that bad. Avoid it.
[+] [-] cyclotron3k|1 year ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|1 year ago|reply
[deleted]