7 ms·

That's a loaded question, and I'm only qualified to answer from my perspective and experience. My biggest gripe with it has always been that it is alpha-quality

That's a loaded question, and I'm only qualified to answer from my perspective and experience. My biggest gripe with it has always been that it is alpha-quality software, even today, that has a central role in an otherwise mature OS ecosystem. It has been widely adopted (some would say forced or tricked into adoption by a few distros) and therefore all the major Linux distributions are now running at an alpha level while its creators try to figure out exactly what they want it to be. That was the state of Linux in the late 90s, a state that it overcame during the 2000s, but now it's regressing again. First it was "just an init to replace SysV", something I could get behind, and back in 2012 or so I was actually excited about it. Then it started growing, replacing individual components of GNU/Linux with a monolithic mega-app that has more in common with Windows NT based OSes than with anything UNIX-like. Gone is the philosophy of "do one thing and do it well", replaced with "do everything no matter the quality of the results". I've always been a Slackware user since I started messing with Linux in the late 90s, and these days I find it getting faster and better while mainstream Linux distros slow down and grow more and more bugs. One of my benchmark systems for observing the growing bloat of modern OSes is an Atom based netbook from around 2010. It shipped with Windows 7 Starter, which it ran acceptably but not great. Recently I tested Windows 10, Slackware 14.2, Ubuntu 14.04, Ubuntu 16.04, Debian unstable, OpenBSD, and Elementary OS Loki on it. Slackware was the fastest OS on it by a wide margin, followed by OpenBSD, then Debian, Ubuntu 14.04, Elementary, Windows, and Ubuntu 16.04 dead last. Guess which of those (not counting Windows) do not have systemd? Yep, Slackware and OpenBSD. Maybe it's a coincidence, but given how Ubuntu 16.04 on my modern workstation gets progressively slower with each systemd update, whereas Slackware on the same machine continues to chug along with no issues, that's telling. All of that said, systemd was and maybe still is a good idea, if only they can stop trying to reinvent the wheel and instead fix the spokes they broke along the way. I can't say I'm happy about eroding the UNIX philosophy from Linux, but if systemd is the future of Linux then it damn well needs to be a stable future.

billforsternz 10y ago
I am puzzled that you had an Atom based netbook from around 2010 that shipped with any kind of Windows 10.
- morganvachon 10y ago
  That was a typo, it shipped with Windows 7 Starter. Fixed now, thanks! :-)
johnny22 10y ago
It didn't just start growing. There was talk of it being the base of the OS (excluding the kernel) since 2012 (as mentioned here http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd-update-3.html http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd-update-3.html). > We have been working hard to turn systemd into the most viable set of components to build operating systems, appliances and devices from, and make it the best choice for servers, for desktops and for embedded environments alike. I think we have a really convincing set of features now, but we are actively working on making it even better. I'm pretty sure I saw others posts, but my googlefu is a bit weak. So, the expansion was in the plan from nearly the beginning (for good or ill)
- sevensor 10y ago
  > There was talk of it being the base of the OS To be fair, that's pretty much the definition of an init system, innit?
- morganvachon 10y ago
  Thanks for that. When I had first heard of it back in 2012, it was right after getting my first Raspberry Pi, and a friend had suggested trying to port systemd to it to improve boot speed. At that time, all I was able to find out about systemd was that it was a faster init. There was nothing I saw back then about the authors wanting to replace all of GNU with it. It was several months later, after the update to systemd broke my Arch installation, that I started reading about how it's growing too fast and rather than focus on code quality and stability, the authors were rushing to make it this huge replacement for GNU. Since then I've followed its progress, and while my overall impression remains slightly negative, I'm hoping it improves to the point that it is stable and mature enough for daily use. Until then, I happily run Slackware for serious work and Windows 10 for games.
qznc 10y ago
I'm an Ubuntu LTS user. Compared to Upstart in 14.04, Systemd is an improvement. ;)
- vacri 10y ago
  Upstart solves the same sysv-init problems that was the motivation for systemd. And systemd should be an improvement - it started after upstart, and hit production well after upstart :)
- reacweb 10y ago
  I am also an Ubuntu LTS user, but more a developer than a system administrator. I have migrated from 14.04 LTS to 16.04 recently. I am using a NAS drive. After my do-release-upgrade -d, internet was not working anymore because of systemd circularity problem. I had to learn how to create systemd configuration files to describe remote filesystem mounts. It was not easy to find documentation on systemd. When my computer enters in sleep mode, I can wake it with a press on enter. The next time, it enters in sleep mode, I can not wake it up anymore. My system used to boot in high resolution. Now, it is using huge fonts that makes boot message impossible to read (25 lines on a 23" screen!). I still do not know how to fix it. It may not be only the fault of systemd, but migration from 14.04 LTS to 16.04 LTS was a very bad experience for me.
  - onli 10y ago
    Ubuntu upgrades almost always suck, but the upgrade from 14.04 to 16.04 was the worst I ever saw. Nothing worked, my system was broken beyond rescue. Pulseaudio all over again.
vacri 10y ago
Ubuntu 16.04 is not meant for lightweight machines - for example, the Unity desktop assumes you have 3D acceleration (which sucks for using in a VM). It's not systemd that makes your atom netbook slow (well, assuming you're using Unity...) Re: systemd itself, I could care less about the bells and whistles, but every time I go back to fiddle with a sysv init script, I yearn for either of upstart or systemd...
- hd4 10y ago
  Ubuntu actually has a low graphics mode so that it can be used in VMs https://insights.ubuntu.com/2016/09/19/low-graphics-mode-in-unity-7/ https://insights.ubuntu.com/2016/09/19/low-graphics-mode-in-...
  - vacri 10y ago
    I stand corrected. Maybe I'm thinking of 14.04?
- morganvachon 10y ago
  Nope, Xfce on all the Linux distros on that machine, except for Elementary. I was surprised to find that Elementary's Pantheon was faster than Xfce on Ubuntu 16.04. Besides, it wasn't a test of DE performance alone, it was a combination of factors including boot time, script run time, video encode/decode, build from source time, and so on. Yes, DE performance was also a metric, and for fun I did load Unity on both 14.04 and 16.04 just to see what would happen. If I were basing it on DE performance alone and used the default DE for each distro, both Ubuntu versions would be the slowest by far. Also, 3D acceleration was not an issue, the Intel video hardware in that machine is fully accelerated in Linux and OpenBSD.
pjmlp 10y ago
The irony of the eroding the UNIX philosophy from Linux is that most real UNIX systems, meaning AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, NeXTSTep (cough macOS), Tru64,... do have something similar to systemd. Sometimes shouting "UNIX philosophy" in GNU/Linux forums reminds me of emigrants that keep traditions of their home countries alive that are long out of fashion back home.
- throwaway2048 10y ago
  commercial unixes haven't been relevant for decades. Unix is linux these days.
  - mort96 10y ago
    How about the second largest desktop OS in the world, OS X (or now macOS)? That's BSD.
    - riffraff 10y ago
      OSX is actually a certified UNIX http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
      - SSLy 10y ago
        and systemd was modelled partially after its launchd
    - Tom4hawk 10y ago
      Mac OS X is not BSD: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Myths https://wiki.freebsd.org/Myths
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    Actually not from the point of view of our enterprise customers, the same that still happily pay for mainframes.
- wruza 10y ago
B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago
> gets progressively slower with each systemd update Windows 10 will not be left behind! I mean, ahead! Microsoft recently pushed out the Anniversary Update, which made at least my Win10 laptop noticeably - as in extra 10 or 15 seconds - slower waking up, and generally more sluggish here and there. (How convenient, 400 million PCs need an upgrade now. Mwahahaha.)
tychuz 10y ago
Boo hoo, systemd makes users happy, works perfectly, easy to configure, I love it on my ArchLinux server, etc etc, but it's NOT THE UNIX WAY SO IT SUCKS AND WE MUST KILL IT WITH FIRE. Who knew - UNIX way is outdated and shit, so doing something like systemd makes Linux a better OS. Screw unix way init systems, and screw unix way /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, /bin, /sbin and any other bin folders scattered everywhere, it's about time 1980s unix way dies and in 2020s we will hopefuly have a fucking /Applications folder.
- morganvachon 10y ago
  > WE MUST KILL IT WITH FIRE. You know, it's funny, I never said that, in fact I said once it matures systemd is actually a good idea. Perhaps you're projecting a bit?
- sctb 10y ago
  Please don't post like this here. We ask that you comment civilly and substantively or not at all.
joonoro 10y ago
Out of curiosity, what were you using to measure the speed of the various operating systems you mentioned?
- morganvachon 10y ago
  For CLI stuff (compiling, file operations etc) it's the time command, for video decode/encode it's built into ffmpeg, and for graphical stuff it's mostly subjective. There's honestly not a ton of difference on most of the CLI stuff since the hardware is the same, but it is measurable. As for the DE, let's just say that Xfce under Slackware and OpenBSD is quick and peppy while Xfce under Debian-based distros is anything but. Ubuntu seemed to be the slowest for that test, and Elementary's Pantheon desktop is a mixed bag. I have considered running the Phoronix test suite for a more accurate result. Also note that I did have to tweak OpenBSD a little to get it on par with Slackware on the desktop, though the stock install is still faster than the more "modern" Linuxen for most tasks. And for those who wonder why I do all of this: It's a hobby. It's more fun than watching TV on my off days, and it keeps me up to date on the latest goings-on in the OS world.
  - joonoro 10y ago
    >There's honestly not a ton of difference on most of the CLI stuff since the hardware is the same, but it is measurable. This is what I was after. I can't imagine ffmpeg running slower just because of systemd or unity. But yeah, if you're running on a 2010 netbook I wouldn't be surprised if it ran better under Xfce.
bitwize 10y ago
When Linux came along in the mid-90s, most commercial Unixes had left behind the Unix philosophy, with their own integrated, object oriented desktop environments and sophisticated administration tools. Only Xenix, the engine that powered many an auto shop's rinky-dink five-user database setup, stuck with the model of text terminals and CLI administration with simple tools. Of course Linux took off, and it sort of reset everything back to stone knives and bearskins. But systemd itself is modelled on Solaris SMF, which is world-class industrial grade service management for large server deployments. Appeals to the "Unix Philosophy" are the province of reactionary greybeards. Unix philosophy means nothing in the modern era.
walter_bishop 10y ago
> Ubuntu 16.04 on my modern workstation gets progressively slower with each systemd update I hadn't noticed a noticeable slowdown on my Ubuntu 16.04. I wouldn't even know about the controversy except people keep mentioning it.

billforsternz 10y ago

I am puzzled that you had an Atom based netbook from around 2010 that shipped with any kind of Windows 10.

morganvachon 10y ago
That was a typo, it shipped with Windows 7 Starter. Fixed now, thanks! :-)

johnny22 10y ago

It didn't just start growing. There was talk of it being the base of the OS (excluding the kernel) since 2012 (as mentioned here http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd-update-3.html http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/systemd-update-3.html). > We have been working hard to turn systemd into the most viable set of components to build operating systems, appliances and devices from, and make it the best choice for servers, for desktops and for embedded environments alike. I think we have a really convincing set of features now, but we are actively working on making it even better. I'm pretty sure I saw others posts, but my googlefu is a bit weak. So, the expansion was in the plan from nearly the beginning (for good or ill)

sevensor 10y ago
> There was talk of it being the base of the OS To be fair, that's pretty much the definition of an init system, innit?
morganvachon 10y ago
Thanks for that. When I had first heard of it back in 2012, it was right after getting my first Raspberry Pi, and a friend had suggested trying to port systemd to it to improve boot speed. At that time, all I was able to find out about systemd was that it was a faster init. There was nothing I saw back then about the authors wanting to replace all of GNU with it. It was several months later, after the update to systemd broke my Arch installation, that I started reading about how it's growing too fast and rather than focus on code quality and stability, the authors were rushing to make it this huge replacement for GNU. Since then I've followed its progress, and while my overall impression remains slightly negative, I'm hoping it improves to the point that it is stable and mature enough for daily use. Until then, I happily run Slackware for serious work and Windows 10 for games.

qznc 10y ago

I'm an Ubuntu LTS user. Compared to Upstart in 14.04, Systemd is an improvement. ;)

vacri 10y ago
Upstart solves the same sysv-init problems that was the motivation for systemd. And systemd should be an improvement - it started after upstart, and hit production well after upstart :)
reacweb 10y ago
I am also an Ubuntu LTS user, but more a developer than a system administrator. I have migrated from 14.04 LTS to 16.04 recently. I am using a NAS drive. After my do-release-upgrade -d, internet was not working anymore because of systemd circularity problem. I had to learn how to create systemd configuration files to describe remote filesystem mounts. It was not easy to find documentation on systemd. When my computer enters in sleep mode, I can wake it with a press on enter. The next time, it enters in sleep mode, I can not wake it up anymore. My system used to boot in high resolution. Now, it is using huge fonts that makes boot message impossible to read (25 lines on a 23" screen!). I still do not know how to fix it. It may not be only the fault of systemd, but migration from 14.04 LTS to 16.04 LTS was a very bad experience for me.
- onli 10y ago
  Ubuntu upgrades almost always suck, but the upgrade from 14.04 to 16.04 was the worst I ever saw. Nothing worked, my system was broken beyond rescue. Pulseaudio all over again.

vacri 10y ago

Ubuntu 16.04 is not meant for lightweight machines - for example, the Unity desktop assumes you have 3D acceleration (which sucks for using in a VM). It's not systemd that makes your atom netbook slow (well, assuming you're using Unity...) Re: systemd itself, I could care less about the bells and whistles, but every time I go back to fiddle with a sysv init script, I yearn for either of upstart or systemd...

hd4 10y ago
Ubuntu actually has a low graphics mode so that it can be used in VMs https://insights.ubuntu.com/2016/09/19/low-graphics-mode-in-unity-7/ https://insights.ubuntu.com/2016/09/19/low-graphics-mode-in-...
- vacri 10y ago
  I stand corrected. Maybe I'm thinking of 14.04?
morganvachon 10y ago
Nope, Xfce on all the Linux distros on that machine, except for Elementary. I was surprised to find that Elementary's Pantheon was faster than Xfce on Ubuntu 16.04. Besides, it wasn't a test of DE performance alone, it was a combination of factors including boot time, script run time, video encode/decode, build from source time, and so on. Yes, DE performance was also a metric, and for fun I did load Unity on both 14.04 and 16.04 just to see what would happen. If I were basing it on DE performance alone and used the default DE for each distro, both Ubuntu versions would be the slowest by far. Also, 3D acceleration was not an issue, the Intel video hardware in that machine is fully accelerated in Linux and OpenBSD.

pjmlp 10y ago

The irony of the eroding the UNIX philosophy from Linux is that most real UNIX systems, meaning AIX, HP-UX, Solaris, NeXTSTep (cough macOS), Tru64,... do have something similar to systemd. Sometimes shouting "UNIX philosophy" in GNU/Linux forums reminds me of emigrants that keep traditions of their home countries alive that are long out of fashion back home.

throwaway2048 10y ago
commercial unixes haven't been relevant for decades. Unix is linux these days.
- mort96 10y ago
  How about the second largest desktop OS in the world, OS X (or now macOS)? That's BSD.
  - riffraff 10y ago
    OSX is actually a certified UNIX http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/ http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/
    - SSLy 10y ago
      and systemd was modelled partially after its launchd
  - Tom4hawk 10y ago
    Mac OS X is not BSD: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Myths https://wiki.freebsd.org/Myths
- pjmlp 10y ago
  Actually not from the point of view of our enterprise customers, the same that still happily pay for mainframes.
wruza 10y ago

B1FF_PSUVM 10y ago

> gets progressively slower with each systemd update Windows 10 will not be left behind! I mean, ahead! Microsoft recently pushed out the Anniversary Update, which made at least my Win10 laptop noticeably - as in extra 10 or 15 seconds - slower waking up, and generally more sluggish here and there. (How convenient, 400 million PCs need an upgrade now. Mwahahaha.)

tychuz 10y ago

Boo hoo, systemd makes users happy, works perfectly, easy to configure, I love it on my ArchLinux server, etc etc, but it's NOT THE UNIX WAY SO IT SUCKS AND WE MUST KILL IT WITH FIRE. Who knew - UNIX way is outdated and shit, so doing something like systemd makes Linux a better OS. Screw unix way init systems, and screw unix way /usr/bin, /usr/local/bin, /bin, /sbin and any other bin folders scattered everywhere, it's about time 1980s unix way dies and in 2020s we will hopefuly have a fucking /Applications folder.

morganvachon 10y ago
> WE MUST KILL IT WITH FIRE. You know, it's funny, I never said that, in fact I said once it matures systemd is actually a good idea. Perhaps you're projecting a bit?
sctb 10y ago
Please don't post like this here. We ask that you comment civilly and substantively or not at all.

joonoro 10y ago

Out of curiosity, what were you using to measure the speed of the various operating systems you mentioned?

morganvachon 10y ago
For CLI stuff (compiling, file operations etc) it's the time command, for video decode/encode it's built into ffmpeg, and for graphical stuff it's mostly subjective. There's honestly not a ton of difference on most of the CLI stuff since the hardware is the same, but it is measurable. As for the DE, let's just say that Xfce under Slackware and OpenBSD is quick and peppy while Xfce under Debian-based distros is anything but. Ubuntu seemed to be the slowest for that test, and Elementary's Pantheon desktop is a mixed bag. I have considered running the Phoronix test suite for a more accurate result. Also note that I did have to tweak OpenBSD a little to get it on par with Slackware on the desktop, though the stock install is still faster than the more "modern" Linuxen for most tasks. And for those who wonder why I do all of this: It's a hobby. It's more fun than watching TV on my off days, and it keeps me up to date on the latest goings-on in the OS world.
- joonoro 10y ago
  >There's honestly not a ton of difference on most of the CLI stuff since the hardware is the same, but it is measurable. This is what I was after. I can't imagine ffmpeg running slower just because of systemd or unity. But yeah, if you're running on a 2010 netbook I wouldn't be surprised if it ran better under Xfce.

bitwize 10y ago

When Linux came along in the mid-90s, most commercial Unixes had left behind the Unix philosophy, with their own integrated, object oriented desktop environments and sophisticated administration tools. Only Xenix, the engine that powered many an auto shop's rinky-dink five-user database setup, stuck with the model of text terminals and CLI administration with simple tools. Of course Linux took off, and it sort of reset everything back to stone knives and bearskins. But systemd itself is modelled on Solaris SMF, which is world-class industrial grade service management for large server deployments. Appeals to the "Unix Philosophy" are the province of reactionary greybeards. Unix philosophy means nothing in the modern era.

walter_bishop 10y ago

> Ubuntu 16.04 on my modern workstation gets progressively slower with each systemd update I hadn't noticed a noticeable slowdown on my Ubuntu 16.04. I wouldn't even know about the controversy except people keep mentioning it.