• @CatTrickery
    link
    194 months ago

    PostmarketOS has had really strange priorities lately. I’m not a fan of the whole ethos of Ubuntu mobile (including their use of SystemD) but at least they have stuck to actually getting every feature working on some devices with reasonable specs. My computer uses KDE and OpenRC and has far fewer issues than it did on SystemD. This feels like a waste of resources to reinvent the wheel.

    • LiveLM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      844 months ago

      Reinventing the wheel is what they were doing without Systemd.
      On their announcement they cite various instances of having to write polyfills and ending up with basically ‘Systemd at home’ but buggier.

      • @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        74 months ago

        Reinventing the wheel is what they were doing without Systemd.

        Weird. We had those wheels before Lennart’s cancer showed up.

        • CarrotsHaveEars
          link
          fedilink
          24 months ago

          I honestly don’t know why you were downvoted so much. You could have get very different responses in a different forum.

    • adONis
      link
      fedilink
      384 months ago

      The project is in an too early phase to debate over SystemD. Can you guys please hold back with these arguments until pmOS reaches at least 4% market share.

      • @leopold@lemmy.kde.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        10
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        There is no minimum market share threshold to discuss the way the software you use is being developed and PostmarketOS will not reach 4% in the foreseeable future (and it probably never will). Desktop Linux only just reached that threshold after decades of work and systemd arguments have been happening for years regardless. The conditions for mobile Linux are considerably less favorable. If we can’t discuss systemd until 4% is reached, we can’t discuss systemd ever. Which is fair, because the systemd horse has already been beaten to death at this point. But not because it hasn’t reached some arbitrary 4% threshold. That makes no sense.

        • @Vincent@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          94 months ago

          If we can’t discuss systemd until 4% is reached, we can’t discuss systemd ever. Which is fair, because the systemd horse has already been beaten to death at this point.

          Exactly :)

          • @corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            44 months ago

            Systemd is the standard for a reason.

            1. bad build process
            2. ignoring best practice
            3. RedHat forcing it on the planet
            4. people forgetting that every deliverable of systemd is a lie.
            • @witx@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              6
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              I don’t have an opinion on the whole systemd debate but are you going to expand on what you’re meaning, or will just keep spewing bs bullet points? Specially n4, wtf do you mean by that?

          • @GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            24 months ago

            It does have disadvantages. The only real advantage of it is the completeness of system administration tools. Since they aren’t that much needed on a phone and the performance of that class of devices is not groundbreaking, using another init system is a good idea. Though it depends on what the specific user wants of course. As long as there is a way to change the init system, it shouldn’t be a problem

            • Possibly linux
              link
              fedilink
              English
              84 months ago

              Another init will be slower and will require much more time and resources though.

                • xcjs
                  link
                  fedilink
                  5
                  edit-2
                  4 months ago

                  Systemd was created to allow parallel initialization, which other init systems lacked. If you want proof that one processor core is slower than one + n, you don’t need to compare init systems to do that.

                  • @GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    2
                    edit-2
                    4 months ago

                    I’ve never heard of that. I only heard that other init systems usually have better performance. And well even if it’s not the case, security is another massive concern

        • @5714@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          174 months ago

          They are giving options, no one is forced anything. People should complain upstream at init systems and desktopmobile environments.

    • Quack Doc
      link
      fedilink
      114 months ago

      ive been working on migrating away from systemd myself, so much headaches. I like the services setup, but man the issues can sometimes be baffling

      • @iegod@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        124 months ago

        Isn’t Linux without systemd just a hobbyists niche exercise in masturbation though, let’s be real.

        • Quack Doc
          link
          fedilink
          14 months ago

          I mean, I don’t really care what it is so long as it works fine.