systemd is a monolithic init, consist of several components packed into one single init which could be controlled via systemctl and more.

pros:
- it got it's own set of tools
- it's all in one solution
- it's making things somewhat easy

cons:
- it's all in one solution, that may includes things that you don't actually need
- if one of the component has a vulnerability hole, the rest are affected

given the above info that i just wrote, if you ask me whenever it's good or not, i would say neither. it will be me that gives you a question, "do you prefer AIO or one task per program?"

the answer for that question will be the answer of your question. but remember, AiO also means some cost.

like an AIO PC, It's simple. Because everything is packed in one.

But then it became a big trouble once the screen is broken & the replacement is no easy.

The same applies to systemd too. Take the xz exploit as a example. One component of a monolithic program had the vulnerability, The entire system is affected

---

In summary:
- Monoliths make recovery harder.
- Minimalism makes management harder.

There are problems with the normal inits out here, Like one distro requires different step to accomplish one task, Or even different tools to accomplish a similar task.

systemd is basically created exactly for that matter. It's not perfect, Yes. But we couldn't deny the fact that it's what revolutionaries linux desktop nowadays.

---
To put it simply: Regular inits suffer from fragmentations.

Just showcasing my alpine-proot script.

Try it: https://github.com/Yonle/alpine-proot

Duality of Yonle

https://h.lecturify.net/u/yonle if you wanna see random shit from this side of me.

you could follow it if you have mastodon