There's many hours of reading the Debian CTTE and bug archives about the system init discussion if you have a bit of time and are that interested.

A short version, which is mostly still applicable and accurate for the large part from the past 2 years, is the Debian debate wiki pages with the arguments for and against various init systems to switch to. It's notable that *no-one* wanted to use sysvinit moving into Jessie, and the votes for upstart were heavily partisan being current and ex-canonical employees or upstart developers ... those without that specific background preferred to switch to systemd. The other semi-serious candidate was openrc but it had poor documentation at the time and wasn't even in the debian archives at the point the discussions started. It was also seen as only a slightly incremental improvement over sysvinit/insserv and not worth the effort of a major modernisation of init ... if everything was going to shift then it needed capabilities like socket activation etc which left upstart or systemd as contenders.

The debian init debate points

The bug for the default init for the CTTE to decide"

Heck Fedora, which is usually portrayed as the Lennart playground for systemd because "Red Hat" doesn't even use -networkd, -resolved or -timed instead preferring NetworkManager, <none> (there's been debate about unbound as a caching daemon in the past but they didn't go anywhere), and chrony for those roles.

You can also just pop something in /etc/rc.d/rc.local and mark it executable on most distributions... But of course then you lose the benefit of a dedicated unit in journald for your script to log in and can't test it via a simple systemctl start

Err systemd and firewalld have nothing to do with each other

I suggest you do a modicum of research next time before spewing such obvious bullshit

cat > /etc/systemd/system/mything.service << EOF
[Unit]
Description=Something to help me remember what this is for

[Service]
Type=oneshot
ExecStart=/usr/local/bin/myscript

[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target
EOF

systemctl enable mything

This assumes a script that you want to run to completion and exit to be considered complete... otherwise you may want a different type (man systemd.service for full details).

If the script is going to kick off any processes you want to hang around beyond the lifetime of the script then add RemainAfterExit=yes

Add any Requires dependency statements or After/Before for ordering direction if that needs to be tuned (man systemd.unit) but otherwise this will be run as soon as multi-user.target is reached.

My laptop is an Intel Skylake integrated GPU and Nvidia GTX 960m discrete GPU.

Running Fedora 25 and nouveau works fine using PRIME to select whether something should run on the Intel or the Nvidia chip.

That's not exactly true ... that 's only if you specifically pay for the Extended Lifecycle Support subscription (which incidentally still supports RHEL4) ...

Red Hat Support Policy

Without that specific extra subscription RHEL5 goes EOL March 2017... and CentOS5 will get the last of its updates then as they don't get and rebuild the ELS packages.

Not /opt ... /snap actually ...

If you install it you'll see you get a 'Core' Ubuntu system in /snap/something-or-other and then overlayed on that is the snap in /snap/app-of-some-kind

So basically they use a not-quite-namespace (pivot-root to be precise) with no container tech to do a "super chroot" (via pivot-root) into an minimal Ubuntu installation to run the app overlayed on that ...

In theory AppArmor ... except confinement only works under Mir ...

And as for the cross distro stuff in the PR statement? The Arch build disables the confinement tech (since it's a Canonical special and not upstreamed) and the Fedora COPR in addition to that only "works" with selinux not enforcing.

Snapd seems to be spreading with the same wildfire potential that systemd did.

Not really ... it was pushed to AUR which anyone can do and is in COPR like anyone can do.

No one from the Fedora side has worked on this, the Canonical employee who has that COPR is not a Fedora packager and the various desktop communities have been coordinating on Flatpak

I'd strongly suggest never taking a Canonical Press Release at face value given the recent history with them...

THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT. Need something /sbin/init didn't already do? Have it launch another, specialized service manager of your choosing. Have it launch several! Original inetd, xinetd, crond, supervise/daemontools, linux-ha / heartbeat, ... plenty of options. Have it integrate with other systems however you need it to. That's why you're an administrator.

The problem is that this results in race conditions and "who watches the watchdog" type of scenarios. Plus if the intermediate supervisor dies for some reason the children with then be reparented to PID1, ie the basic simple init, and the restarted supervisor would then lose sight of them properly (ie no longer a parent so can't wait() on them).

Fedora can't even do that any more... Fedora IS the upstream and there's basically no one who can push back at the Fedora level for a dumb upstream systemd decision

Note quite. Fedora is not the upstream for systemd, systemd is its own upstream and frankly has been driven more by CoreOS needs than Fedora ones recently (with the whole resolved and networkd stuff which are not used in Fedora since we use NetworkManager). Check the number of patches in the F24 spec for instance. The discussion is ongoing at the moment and this will become a F25 change that gets debated by FESCO. It's likely that the Server and Workstation product, for instance, may split in their behaviours here given the different use cases.

systemd was and is a power grab, plain and simple

No it is an attempt to fix our broken init landscape (it's notable that no one wanted to keep sysvinit as the default in the Debian CTTE decision) and solved not only the sysvinit problems but the upstart ones as well.

Go back and look at any of the small decisions over time from Fedora 15 onward made to make it extremely inconvenient to use any other init system anywhere in the ecosystem.

Fedora is a well integrated distribution with a set scope of things supported clearly defined. Just as we don't support a BSD kernel the fundamental frameworks are made clear so that the stuff packaged can be well tested against that base.

People who didn't want to use systemd absolutely were being subjected to it against our will. To claim otherwise is ludicrous.

You are entirely free to use Slackware, Gentoo, Debian, Devuan or any other non-systemd distro you wish. It's notable that Arch and Suse switched to systemd of their own free will and neither are downstream of Fedora or subject to decisions there.

Note that systemd-230 has only just been released so it's only arrived in Rawhide.

Fedora 24 will still ship with systemd-229

You can switch to this behaviour by changing your logind.conf on F23 or F24 but obviously that won't entirely act as systemd-230 since it won't have the same code path.

The question has been raised about this being adopted in F25 and no doubt FESCO will have to make a decision as a system wide change.

There is a reasonable likelihood this default behaviour in Fedora will be rejected - or at least only in the Workstation product with the Server product maintaining the old behaviour.