I think this is what annoys me most about systemd. All of the advantages you list seem extremely niche to me.
I mean network interfaces that don't change names? I think in over 15 years of using Linux I have never had a problem with this, and if I did I'm guessing it would be a) obvious b) trivial to fix. Same with the other stuff.
To get these niche features we need to install a very complex, opaque, fragile and verbose set of tools that throw away most of what I've learned in my 15 years. Blah!
> I think in over 15 years of using Linux I have never had a problem with this, and if I did I'm guessing it would be a) obvious b) trivial to fix.
I have run into this. Two wired Ethernet NICs in a system. After a kernel upgrade, the module load order of each NIC got swapped, and the name of each NIC changed. Took me a while to track that one down. :P
For 99.9% of desktop users (and -I suspect- many servers), this doesn't ever matter, and the "predictable" names are substantially less predictable and discoverable than 'eth0' or 'wlan0' or whatever.
Additionally, if you move a NIC in your system to another expansion slot in the system, its name will change. So, there's that to remember about this particular scheme.
NOTE: I'm not trying to claim that it's not helpful! The "predictable network interface" naming scheme solves a real problem. It's just that it -like most things- creates a few unique problems of its own. ;)
I mean network interfaces that don't change names? I think in over 15 years of using Linux I have never had a problem with this, and if I did I'm guessing it would be a) obvious b) trivial to fix. Same with the other stuff.
To get these niche features we need to install a very complex, opaque, fragile and verbose set of tools that throw away most of what I've learned in my 15 years. Blah!