• Systemd-init has a larger attack surface compared to runit, openrc, or sysVinit.

  • Systemd-logind relies on systemd, so we need to adapt it for non-systemD distributions to ensure compatibility with certain applications like GNOME.

  • Udev also depends on systemd.

  • SystemD is specific to Linux, which makes porting software to *BSD even more challenging. It’s uncertain what the future holds, and there may be circumstances where Linux becomes unusable for you (e.g., compatibility issues with your laptop). Having a good alternative that doesn’t require relearning everything is generally beneficial.

  • SystemD-based distributions often come with more than just “systemd-init.” They include additional components like logind, resolved, networkd, systemd-timers, etc. However, many people still prefer using the alternatives they were accustomed to before systemd became popular, such as dhcpcd and cron. Consequently, having both sets of tools installed can increase the attack surface.

  • Unsafe@discuss.onlineOP
    14·
    11 months ago

    It doesn’t, that’s ridiculous, several distros don’t use systemd and still have udev

    Void uses eudev. Alpine uses eudev. Gentoos uses udev with patches. What non-systemd distros use vanilla udev?

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      4·
      11 months ago

      Ah, so with udev you meant systemd-udev, in that case the answer is the same as systemd-login, complaining that a systemd module doesn’t work outside of systemd is ridiculous.

      • Unsafe@discuss.onlineOP
        12·
        11 months ago

        The thing is that it can work. Which shown by eudev. Looks like it’s important for Red Hat to make everyone dependent on SystemD suit.