As I said: I didn’t mean massive in the sense of “disk space is an expensive resource”. Disk is cheap nowadays. I meant massive as in “there is a lot of code and by that a lot of complexity in this one binary”. You just inferred I meant bloat. I get that that is my fault for not specifying it the first time But I already explained I didn’t mean that so I don’t really get why you keep riding that 10 meg point.
Sorry but there is a libsystemd-shared listed in your screenshot
[XXX@YYY]$ ls -lh /usr/lib/libsystemd.so.0.40.0 /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-core-257.7-1.so /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-shared-257.7-1.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.2M Jun 25 14:42 /usr/lib/libsystemd.so.0.40.0
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2.4M Jun 25 14:42 /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-core-257.7-1.so
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4.5M Jun 25 14:42 /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-shared-257.7-1.so
Are you intentionally misrepresenting this or are you actually missing these? Also: This isn’t about diskspace. Obviously every halfway modern PC can provide the disk space to house the systemd binaries. Disk is cheap but crucially not necessarily tied to complexity. A simple application can take Gigs and still be simple if it includes a lot of resources (graphical, audio, whatever). And a very complex thing can “only” take a few megabytes if it only includes code. Like systemd does.
Note that I am a (mostly) happy user of systemd. I am just annoyed at people misrepresenting facts to fight anti-systemd-bullshit.
Did you accidentally forget A) the .so files these binaries link against and B) the actual systemd daemon binary?
Well it is also a massive executable in the mix there
I dont have a problem with systemd. I have a problem with people claiming systemd doesn’t have a massive non-modular blob of code at it’s core. There is no need to misrepresent what systemd is to deflect systemd critics.
Again, please read what I am writing. I don’t care about the disk space. And I don’t have a problem with systemd itself.