<story><title>The bad side of systemd: two recent systemd failures</title><url>http://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/linux/SystemdCrashAndMore</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>ultramancool</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m no fan of systemd, but do we really need to be nitpicking its every failing? The alternatives are certainly not perfect either. If you don&amp;#x27;t like it, don&amp;#x27;t use it. Many distros are still committed to supporting other init systems along side systemd and many BSDs have a very good philosophy with things like this and may be worth a look too.&lt;p&gt;Can we just agree to move on? I&amp;#x27;m sick of the endless banter. If you like systemd, use it, if you don&amp;#x27;t like it, don&amp;#x27;t. If you think it needs more time to mature, stay away from it for a while and experiment occasionally. That&amp;#x27;s my plan at least.</text></comment>
<story><title>The bad side of systemd: two recent systemd failures</title><url>http://utcc.utoronto.ca/~cks/space/blog/linux/SystemdCrashAndMore</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>lstyls</author><text>How much of the blame should systemd be taking for these bugs? Unless the same segfault is happening on other distros, this seems like a problem in Fedora rather than systemd.&lt;p&gt;I suppose this does give some substance to the systemd criticisms that it is too system-critical for a process that is technically outside of the Linux kernel.</text></comment>