So frustrierend systemd ist, so erfrischend ist es etwas darüber zu lesen, was über die übliche Kritik oder die lalala-es-is-alles-toll Verteidigung hinausgeht. Dass dabei systemd nicht gut wegkommt gefällt mir natürlich auch, denn es bestätigt meinen initialen Eindruck als nutzerunfreundliches System.
Der Artikel (via) kommt zu diesem Fazit:
Despite its overarching abstractions, it is semantically non-uniform and its complicated transaction and job scheduling heuristics ordered around a dependently networked object system create pathological failure cases with little debugging context that would otherwise not necessarily occur on systems with less layers of indirection. The use of bus APIs complicate communication with the service manager and lead to duplication of the object model for little gain.
Further, the unit file options often carry implicit state or are not sufficiently expressive. There is an imbalance with regards to features of an eager service manager and that of a lazy loading service manager, having rusty edge cases of both with non-generic, manager-specific facilities. The approach to logging and the circularly dependent architecture seem to imply that lots of prior art has been ignored or understudied.
