|»|3 guest@cc 1969-12-31T17:00:00
its fine to 'not mind using it', theres more of a philisohical and design argument to be had if you'd LIKE to use it. but, opposing it without really understanding why beyond 'leet people told me so' is probably just as bad even if on the right side.
I cant think of even one situation in my use of linux in which any init system has been an important necessary part of my computing. They're just sort of there.
before Id used any system without an 'init system' ala systemd openrc sysv whatever, I just sort of assumed it was some kind of Vital System Component tm that was necessary, obviously
but no, just starting the shit you want with &, and at most putting its pid in a file somewhere, its fine. Ive had no problems. if, as it is clearly not, this isn't even a requirement at all, so even if I did find it helpful for something why should it be this gigantic million LOC abomination that does everything in this super special unique way? this is just stupid. think of all the hours of human thought wasted on those hundreds of thousands of lines of code just to start some programs in the background. software is really an intellectual black hole. we'd be on mars by now if not for computers, even accounting for what progress not having them would mean losing.
just start the stuff you want. if you really need to "manage" it, thats still just a means to start things.
I hear the reason that its easier than writing scripts but that just makes me think you were writing grossly overcomplicated scripts with every stupid convention and tooling and whatever else someone ever told you you DEFINITELY NEED in them. Just start the shit you want to be running.
I use the init system my distro comes with when I use linux, and I dont mind it, because I just use it to do what I need from linux and its what it comes with. If it came with systemd I wouldnt mind either in the same sense, until it overwrote efivars an dbricked my system of course. but its bad design.