• 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
    35·
    11 months ago

    Yes, systemd modules depend on systemd, that’s like complaining that a GUI application depends on X.

    SystemD is not modular. Logind is just an executable that depends on systemD libs. Red Hat could design it to be init-agnostic(similar to elogind). But they didn’t. Any assumptions, why?

    • Nibodhika@lemmy.world
      7·
      11 months ago

      Yes module is not the correct word, but that’s nitpicking, the concept is still the same, it’s a binary that depends on systemd, that’s a developer choice, same as using GTK or Qt, there are up and downsides to choose what your program depends on, the developers of systemd-logind decided to depend on systemd knowing the downsides, and distros decide to use it also knowing of them. As for your question possibly the answer is that the added difficulties of making it system agnostic did not compensated for the low user base, same reason most games don’t have a native binary.

      • Unsafe@discuss.onlineOP
        42·
        11 months ago

        the added difficulties of making it system agnostic did not compensated for the low user base

        • 2003: Udev was launched, providing support for musl, non-systemd distros, and others.
        • 2004: NetworkManager was launched, with Udev as a crucial dependency.
        • 2006: Dbus was created without dependencies on distro-specific packages.
        • 2009: Dbus becomes a dependency for NetworkManager.
        • 2010: Red Hat introduces systemd, with core components including logind, journald, and timers.
        • 2012: Developers made udev less compatible with old kernels, musl-based, and non-systemd Linux distros by merging it with systemd. You can find more information about this here: https://lwn.net/Articles/490413, https://lwn.net/Articles/529314/
        • 2017: PipeWire was launched, with logind as a dependency.
        • 2017: Reimplementations of the bus protocol called dbus-broker were launched. Its compatibility launcher requires systemd.
        • 2020: After systemd had already been adopted by all major distros, systemd-tmpfiles gained the ability to be built as a standalone executable.
        • 2022: WirePlumber was launched, with pipewire as a hard dependency.

        Looks like Red Hat makes everything they can systemd-dependent. Including Gnome.