4 ms·
> Systemd on the other hand is tightly coupled Not really. All its various components are loosely coupled over DBus, and most are entirely optional. There's no
by creshal 11y ago
> Systemd on the other hand is tightly coupled
Not really. All its various components are loosely coupled over DBus, and most are entirely optional. There's no technical reason why people can't e.g. implement journald's API in syslog. Or replace the various userspace *ctls (timedatectl, hostnamectl, …), or reimplement logind on top of some BSD (already done, actually), …
- digi_owl 11y agoYou seem to be confusing the interface between systemd components and third parties, with internal interfaces. The latter are expressly non-documented, and non-stable, to allow the systemd devs to change them as they see fit. As for logind on BSD, got a link? Last i recall they were struggling because it was a sprawling and moving target (Consolekit2 is also having that problem). One example is that recently logind took over much fo the job upower used to do, with upower now being a compatibility wrapper around logind. Oh btw, dbus is massively more opaque that being able to run a command, look at the output, and then pipe that to another with the proper flags and such.
- TheyW0ntL1sten 11y agoDude, there's literally nothing you can say that will change people's mind on this subject. It has long since crossed into some kind of identity subject.
- JdeBP 11y ago> reimplement logind on top of some BSD (already done, actually) If you're thinking of SystemBSD, you are incorrect. There has been no publicly visible change on that front in the past year. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10176275 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10176275 * http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/debian-systemd-packaging-hoo-hah.html#systemBSD http://homepage.ntlworld.com./jonathan.deboynepollard/FGA/de...