"now with 42 percent less Unix philosophy", since HN seems to be lacking something to argue about here.<p>It is interesting because one of the primary accusations leveled against systemd has long been[0] that it's a monolithic and tightly integrated behemoth, in contrast to the unix philosophy (however imperfectly realized) of orthogonal tools that "do one thing and do it well". Defenders of systemd often retort[1] that systemd <i>is</i> modular, and that its many components can be separated - although the reality is not so friendly. Does this openly combative tagline represent an admission that systemd's hostility to piecemeal replacement is intentional? Or is it just a trollish crow of victory against systemd's historical naysayers, to celebrate this release number milestone?<p>[0] <a href="https://lwn.net/Articles/440650/" rel="nofollow">https://lwn.net/Articles/440650/</a>
[1] <a href="https://lwn.net/Articles/440753/" rel="nofollow">https://lwn.net/Articles/440753/</a>