SystemD is a Linux cancer that continues to grow uncheked. If this keeps up, a base Linux system will be nothing more than the Kernel, Systemd, and Bash.
My biggest concern is that distros like Debian and CentOS, whose goals normally include stability to the point that they are often railed against for including old, sometimes too old software, have adopted Systemd before it had any real rollout and experience.
I could see distros like arch, that want to test new stuff and are known to work on bleeding edge software would make sense.
> My biggest concern is that distros like Debian and CentOS, whose goals normally include stability to the point that they are often railed against for including old, sometimes too old software, have adopted Systemd before it had any real rollout and experience.
That's a bit disingenuous, Fedora 15 (released May 2011) was the first distribution to enable systemd by default, so there were at least 2 years of "rollout and experience" when Debian 8 (April 2015) and CentOS 7 (July 2014) switched. And at least in the case of Debian, it was already available as an option since 2012.
2 years on one distro (that as far as I know, isn't popular for server-based infrastructure) is not what I would consider "real rollout or experience".
And yes, while available in debian, very few people used it for the reasons I'm talking about: it hasn't been heavily tested.
Which strengths the original point. RHEL is suppose to be rock-solid. systemd is not (technical issues aside, it's new and should be vetted more thoroughly), and I have no idea why RH and Debian are staking so much on it. That's what bothers me.
You are getting cancer from being offered some software for free? That sound a bit hyperbolic to me. No one is forced to used anything, the old alternatives are still there, and distributions like Debian supports both new and old.
