[log in to unmask]">I had not heard the history of SystemD in any detail.  What, if any, were the software engineering and design justifications for SystemD?  I recall some vague mentions of "designs for the future"

Have a look at the SystemD Wikipedia entry which links to the SystemD home page.

As I understand it the initial impetus for SystemD (as with all the other competing init systems) was the perception that SysVInit was/is obsolete or not suitable for modern life. One of SystemD's claimed advantages over SysV was faster booting. However, in my experience similarly specced SysV machines seem to boot faster!

It's difficult to say anything about SystemD without it becoming political/religious but my impression is that the bloat and mission creep that SystemD seems in many people's views to suffer from (i.e. it is no longer just an init system) is perhaps less about "software engineering and design justifications" and perhaps more about mindshare grab and ecosystem control. I claim nothing; I merely report common views. ;-)