6 ms·

I don't want to start this discussion but it largely comes down to taste. Some people don't want to run dbus or have no use for journald. If you put your daemon

by nisa 11y ago

I don't want to start this discussion but it largely comes down to taste. Some people don't want to run dbus or have no use for journald. If you put your daemons into runit you can have a small and lean image without dbus. Personally I loathe network manager in RHEL7 but that's not a systemd problem.

cwyers 11y ago
I understand that there are people who don't have a use for journald. It strikes me as odd to look at journald's feature set and conclude that this is being driven primarily by desktop support to the exclusion of servers, though.
- digi_owl 11y ago
  Frankly i suspect journald is one bother backing the other. The basic concepts journald is built on is lifted straight out of a doctorate thesis written by Lennart Poettering's brother. Thinking about i don't think systemd really have a goal. It seems to be a hodgepodge of Poettering itch scratching, Gnome/Fedora/Freedesktop NIH-ing, and a bunch of "because we can" sub-projects.
ambrice 11y ago
If you don't like systemd in general that's one thing, but to claim that systemd only benefits desktops is just wrong. I'm just tired of the "systemd only goal is boot speed" argument. Too many people want to join the crowd and get their old-school linux user credentials by bashing systemd without understanding or acknowledging the benefits. sysvinit maintainers must love systemd. Before systemd came along there were lots of complaints about what a terrible hack sysvinit is. Now it's a paragon of simplicity and stability without having actually changed any..
- erpellan 11y ago
  Yes, wouldn't a server want to depend on the DESKTOP BUS? Ok, snarky, yes. Still want to know the answer :) Also, why is it that the ONLY alternative ever mentioned is sysvinit? Systemd is not the 2nd init system ever invented, nor even the 4th or 5th. There are simpler alternatives. Binary log files? Don't even get me started.
  - ambrice 11y ago
    You think if it wasn't for systemd your server wouldn't need dbus? You wouldn't be running docker on that server either..
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  If I had a dollar for every time a systemd supporter compared it to upstart without provocation, I'd have exactly zero dollars. If I had a dollar for every time a systemd supporter reminded us that we need systemd because runsv was a terrible hack, on the other hand...
  - colanderman 11y ago
    As a neutral party, one thing I'll say about systemd is at least they understand what a dependency is. I still haven't figured out why the upstart people think it's a good idea for a service to magically start just because its dependencies are fulfilled. Maybe they think system services are like proteins or something.
    - scurvy 11y ago
      Someone tell that to RedHat. They consider the network "up" once the device gets link, not when the system gets an IP address. Even in environments without spanning tree, this is a problem due to massive parallelization -- spawning 30 processes 5ms after the network is "up" but doesn't have an IP from DHCP yet. The solution? Put a sleep 7 in there, thus making the entire process slower than the previous solution.
      - crdoconnor 11y ago
        Wow, that's disgusting.
      - ibotty 11y ago
        That's wrong. Read about it at https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/NetworkTarget/ https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/NetworkTar...
        scurvy 11y ago
        So either I use systemd's sleep or my sleep, but either way it's broken out of the box. Great job! EDIT: RHEL/CentOS only supports NetworkManager for this. Which sucks if you don't want to run NetworkManager (for a litany of reasons). $ yum whatprovides "*/systemd-networkd-wait-online.service" No matches found

by nisa 11y ago

cwyers 11y ago

I understand that there are people who don't have a use for journald. It strikes me as odd to look at journald's feature set and conclude that this is being driven primarily by desktop support to the exclusion of servers, though.

digi_owl 11y ago
Frankly i suspect journald is one bother backing the other. The basic concepts journald is built on is lifted straight out of a doctorate thesis written by Lennart Poettering's brother. Thinking about i don't think systemd really have a goal. It seems to be a hodgepodge of Poettering itch scratching, Gnome/Fedora/Freedesktop NIH-ing, and a bunch of "because we can" sub-projects.

ambrice 11y ago

If you don't like systemd in general that's one thing, but to claim that systemd only benefits desktops is just wrong. I'm just tired of the "systemd only goal is boot speed" argument. Too many people want to join the crowd and get their old-school linux user credentials by bashing systemd without understanding or acknowledging the benefits. sysvinit maintainers must love systemd. Before systemd came along there were lots of complaints about what a terrible hack sysvinit is. Now it's a paragon of simplicity and stability without having actually changed any..

erpellan 11y ago
Yes, wouldn't a server want to depend on the DESKTOP BUS? Ok, snarky, yes. Still want to know the answer :) Also, why is it that the ONLY alternative ever mentioned is sysvinit? Systemd is not the 2nd init system ever invented, nor even the 4th or 5th. There are simpler alternatives. Binary log files? Don't even get me started.
- ambrice 11y ago
  You think if it wasn't for systemd your server wouldn't need dbus? You wouldn't be running docker on that server either..
crdoconnor 11y ago
If I had a dollar for every time a systemd supporter compared it to upstart without provocation, I'd have exactly zero dollars. If I had a dollar for every time a systemd supporter reminded us that we need systemd because runsv was a terrible hack, on the other hand...
- colanderman 11y ago
  As a neutral party, one thing I'll say about systemd is at least they understand what a dependency is. I still haven't figured out why the upstart people think it's a good idea for a service to magically start just because its dependencies are fulfilled. Maybe they think system services are like proteins or something.
  - scurvy 11y ago
    Someone tell that to RedHat. They consider the network "up" once the device gets link, not when the system gets an IP address. Even in environments without spanning tree, this is a problem due to massive parallelization -- spawning 30 processes 5ms after the network is "up" but doesn't have an IP from DHCP yet. The solution? Put a sleep 7 in there, thus making the entire process slower than the previous solution.
    - crdoconnor 11y ago
      Wow, that's disgusting.
    - ibotty 11y ago
      That's wrong. Read about it at https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/NetworkTarget/ https://wiki.freedesktop.org/www/Software/systemd/NetworkTar...
      - scurvy 11y ago
        So either I use systemd's sleep or my sleep, but either way it's broken out of the box. Great job! EDIT: RHEL/CentOS only supports NetworkManager for this. Which sucks if you don't want to run NetworkManager (for a litany of reasons). $ yum whatprovides "*/systemd-networkd-wait-online.service" No matches found