The effort of dealing with the increasing amount of software that expects systemd to run underneath makes all these initiatives not very worth it unless you buy heavily in the political, rather than technicals reasons, of avoiding systemd.

I don’t care. I have run Linux machines since 2001 and systemd is one of the least offensive reinvention of the wheel I have had to deal with. All software is shit one way or another, all that matters is how much effort do I have to spend to find myself dealing with another, unsupported pile of shit.

Every time I see no systemd - I remind myself of this post: https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/4lzxs3/why_did_a...

> What most systemd critics consider "bloat", I consider necessary complexity to solve a complex problem generically.

- every software has bugs, even curl does, does that mean you ll start a new website called nocurl.org?

showing a list of bugs and vulnerabilities is not a compelling case against systemd, or it is a compelling case agains every single piece of software.... providing an argument *why* systemd is bad is what I expect

That's a shockingly light list of bugs.

Guaranteed that the replacements would have a combined list at least as bad.

"Bait used to be believable."