Freedesktop provides hosting for systemd, but it is not really a project under their banner.
I won't go into it that deeply, but I think departure from the "unix way" is folly and will only make administration more difficult.
"There is nothing more gray, stultifying, and dreary than a life lived inside a theory." --Jaron Lanier
Unix as a design philosophy is dead, or it is in serious need of a revamp in order to cope with the realities of modern systems. The complexities of modern software call for parts that function together as an integrated whole and are designed to work with each other -- not parts that fulfill one limited task and abdicate all further responsibility. It's time to let go of the 1970s conception of the Unix way if we want to build Linux into a modern system.
In fact both the dominant desktop Unix -- Mac OS X -- and the dominant proprietary server Unix -- Solaris -- employ an advanced init system similar in many respects to systemd. So there is already established precedent in the Unix realm for what Lennart is doing for Linux with systemd.
And again, there is overwhelming support for it in the Linux community, so much so that support for non-systemd configurations is already drying up in a variety of third-party upstreams. Systemd is the path of least resistance.
> Unix as a design philosophy is dead, or it is in serious need of a revamp in order to cope with the realities of modern systems.
Oh, you young whippersnapper, there is still so much in the world for you to learn.
IT is the poster child of the NIH syndrome. No other knowledge area suffers from it as much as IT does. For a system design paradigm to have survived 50+ years in this environment, it must be quite good.
Settling on dbus for IPC is about as bad as settling with CORBA would have been ten years ago. Settling with a simp!e Unix socket following the everything-is-a-file paradigm is just as correct today as it was in the sixties.
dbus provides useful abstractions -- like broadcast/multicast -- that are lacking in the traditional Unix IPC mechanisms and are cumbersome and slow to implement.
That's a big part of why it's superseding almost every other IPC mechanism out there for critical system messages, and why it's going into the kernel.
I won't go into it that deeply, but I think departure from the "unix way" is folly and will only make administration more difficult.
"There is nothing more gray, stultifying, and dreary than a life lived inside a theory." --Jaron Lanier
Unix as a design philosophy is dead, or it is in serious need of a revamp in order to cope with the realities of modern systems. The complexities of modern software call for parts that function together as an integrated whole and are designed to work with each other -- not parts that fulfill one limited task and abdicate all further responsibility. It's time to let go of the 1970s conception of the Unix way if we want to build Linux into a modern system.
In fact both the dominant desktop Unix -- Mac OS X -- and the dominant proprietary server Unix -- Solaris -- employ an advanced init system similar in many respects to systemd. So there is already established precedent in the Unix realm for what Lennart is doing for Linux with systemd.
And again, there is overwhelming support for it in the Linux community, so much so that support for non-systemd configurations is already drying up in a variety of third-party upstreams. Systemd is the path of least resistance.