Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

> I'm not sure why systemd not being portable to other operating systems is suddenly a big deal.

Because software being written that has systemd as a dependency will be Linux only software.




> Because software being written that has systemd as a dependency will be Linux only software.

And this is news, and suddenly it's systemd's fault?

If you hate Linux-only software, software that depends on systemd is the last of your problems. Software that depends on glibc and the Linux kernel are probable the main offenders.

-----


Generally when software relies on glibc or the Linux kernel it can be patched so that it works on the BSD's. In my time of porting to OS X for example I haven't had anyone not take my patch to fix a problem an upstream it with a "thanks!". This becomes more problematic with systemd, whereby we can't port systemd, and since the software depends on systemd (most likely for some reason or another the software developer thought it was a good idea) we can't easily replace/rip out those parts of the code and make it run on the BSD's.

-----


There are currently 23946[1] FreeBSD ports. Nothing I ever needed in the last 15 years of using FreeBSD was missing. Yes, dependency on glibc and the Linux kernel is sometimes annoying, but in practice it is not an insurmountable problem. Dependency on the Linux kernel is rare and dependency on glibc can usually be easily fixed and upstream is usually happy to accept patches. Systemd is different because there is a lot of software that might decide to use it and you can't just work around it.

[1] http://www.freebsd.org/ports/

-----




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: