4 ms·

The way systemd is structured it's next to impossible to use any parts of it outside of systemd, nomenclature is ridiculous (system daemon, what's that even sup

by cisstrd 10y ago

The way systemd is structured it's next to impossible to use any parts of it outside of systemd, nomenclature is ridiculous (system daemon, what's that even supposed to mean?), it suffers greatly from feature creep, took over logging using a binary format, gained basic firewall controls , assimilated udev, incorporated a bootloader, ... and some additional things people took/take offence with: introduced to quickly, criticism was shut out instead of being debated, promises were broken, main developers behind it are quite arrogant and often ignorant when dealing with complaints/bugs... et cetera there is a reason why Lennart is good in stirring up controversy, and it's not because everyone is just against him for no reason. some further reading/links that might interest you: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608798/data-center/systemd--harbinger-of-the-linux-apocalypse.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608798/data-center/systemd... http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608864/data-center/choose-your-side-on-the-linux-divide.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608864/data-center/choose-... http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608870/linux/you-have-your-windows-in-my-linux.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608870/linux/you-have-your... http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0// http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0// http://suckless.org/sucks/systemd http://suckless.org/sucks/systemd edit: systemd might be perfect for you or other people, I don't doubt that, it might make things easier for some, in some respects in might do some things better, but if the debate (as it is now) is whether it follows the unix philosophy or not, I don't think one can reasonably make the case that it does

chris_wot 10y ago
I notice you have added an aside :-) > edit: systemd might be perfect for you or other people, I don't doubt that, it might make things easier for some, in some respects in might do some things better, but if the debate (as it is now) is whether it follows the unix philosophy or not, I don't think one can reasonably make the case that it does I can and have made that case :-) I guess we'll agree to disagree. > The way systemd is structured it's next to impossible to use any parts of it outside of systemd Well that's not true. If you want to swap out a systemd daemon with another one, then you just have to write another service configuration file - see here: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.service.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.ser... > nomenclature is ridiculous (system daemon, what's that even supposed to mean?) It's the daemon that runs the system. init, you realise, is a daemon process? As in, it's a process that runs in the background that is not under direct user control? > it suffers greatly from feature creep A lot of folks quite like the features it has introduced, but that's subjective > took over logging using a binary format journald can be configured to do text logging... > gained basic firewall controls It's a component of the system, which doesn't have to be used. > assimilated udev I just cannot understand why this is such a big deal. udev is a userspace daemon that interacts with the kernel, it has had zero negative effect on anyone and it makes total sense for the ones maintaining the init system to integrate it into their tree and maintain it going forward! > incorporated a bootloader You can swap it out. Why is this a concern? > ... and some additional things people took/take offence with: introduced to quickly, criticism was shut out instead of being debated, promises were broken, main developers behind it are quite arrogant and often ignorant when dealing with complaints/bugs... et cetera there is a reason why Lennart is good in stirring up controversy, and it's not because everyone is just against him for no reason. I'll stick with technical issues, not personalities. Just reviewing your links: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 No technical reasons given as to the concern over systemd, only some personality clashes ("Kick these fucking carpetbaggers to the curb!" - now there's a convincing argument!) --- http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... Yeah, I've read most of these, I'm really not convinced by any of the arguments --- http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608798/data-center/systemd--harbinger-of-the-linux-apocalypse.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608798/data-center/systemd... The guy rehashes the same arguments you are making, and I've already addressed each of them - I disagree! --- http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608864/data-center/choose-your-side-on-the-linux-divide.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608864/data-center/choose-... Same author, same arguments - but with a side-dish of "what would the grey-beards think?" and concocted outrage over an apparent schism within the Linux community. --- http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608870/linux/you-have-your-windows-in-my-linux.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608870/linux/you-have-your... Same author again, and this time the argument is: You have your Windows in my Linux Ultimately, the schism over systemd could lead to a separation of desktop and server distros, or Linux server admins moving to FreeBSD --- http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0// http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0// Yeah, that article was largely prompted by myself I think. I promised vezzny-ford I'd read this, and I never got around to it. I'll eventually do so :-) --- http://suckless.org/sucks/systemd http://suckless.org/sucks/systemd I'll have a read - looks interesting.

by cisstrd 10y ago

chris_wot 10y ago

I notice you have added an aside :-) > edit: systemd might be perfect for you or other people, I don't doubt that, it might make things easier for some, in some respects in might do some things better, but if the debate (as it is now) is whether it follows the unix philosophy or not, I don't think one can reasonably make the case that it does I can and have made that case :-) I guess we'll agree to disagree. > The way systemd is structured it's next to impossible to use any parts of it outside of systemd Well that's not true. If you want to swap out a systemd daemon with another one, then you just have to write another service configuration file - see here: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.service.html https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.ser... > nomenclature is ridiculous (system daemon, what's that even supposed to mean?) It's the daemon that runs the system. init, you realise, is a daemon process? As in, it's a process that runs in the background that is not under direct user control? > it suffers greatly from feature creep A lot of folks quite like the features it has introduced, but that's subjective > took over logging using a binary format journald can be configured to do text logging... > gained basic firewall controls It's a component of the system, which doesn't have to be used. > assimilated udev I just cannot understand why this is such a big deal. udev is a userspace daemon that interacts with the kernel, it has had zero negative effect on anyone and it makes total sense for the ones maintaining the init system to integrate it into their tree and maintain it going forward! > incorporated a bootloader You can swap it out. Why is this a concern? > ... and some additional things people took/take offence with: introduced to quickly, criticism was shut out instead of being debated, promises were broken, main developers behind it are quite arrogant and often ignorant when dealing with complaints/bugs... et cetera there is a reason why Lennart is good in stirring up controversy, and it's not because everyone is just against him for no reason. I'll stick with technical issues, not personalities. Just reviewing your links: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/8/12/459 No technical reasons given as to the concern over systemd, only some personality clashes ("Kick these fucking carpetbaggers to the curb!" - now there's a convincing argument!) --- http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_... Yeah, I've read most of these, I'm really not convinced by any of the arguments --- http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608798/data-center/systemd--harbinger-of-the-linux-apocalypse.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608798/data-center/systemd... The guy rehashes the same arguments you are making, and I've already addressed each of them - I disagree! --- http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608864/data-center/choose-your-side-on-the-linux-divide.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608864/data-center/choose-... Same author, same arguments - but with a side-dish of "what would the grey-beards think?" and concocted outrage over an apparent schism within the Linux community. --- http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608870/linux/you-have-your-windows-in-my-linux.html http://www.infoworld.com/article/2608870/linux/you-have-your... Same author again, and this time the argument is: You have your Windows in my Linux Ultimately, the schism over systemd could lead to a separation of desktop and server distros, or Linux server admins moving to FreeBSD --- http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0// http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0// Yeah, that article was largely prompted by myself I think. I promised vezzny-ford I'd read this, and I never got around to it. I'll eventually do so :-) --- http://suckless.org/sucks/systemd http://suckless.org/sucks/systemd I'll have a read - looks interesting.