4 ms·

> "Systemd is defective by design." The most succinct explanation of Systemd possible.

by tcoppi 10y ago

mSparks 10y ago
I've complained a few times that systemd haters havent explained the hate. having read this post I'd say a slightly less succinct but infinitely more informative version would be > "Systemd is defective by design because they totally disregard the fail-safe by design rules"
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Yes. I wish people would explain their hatred. I understand that there are valid reasons to hate systemd, which is why I avoid it like the plague. But so many people get sucked in by the initial usefulness, and don't see the problems lurking beneath the surface.
  - 5ilv3r 10y ago
    Binary only logs was enough for me to hate it.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      That's it? Man that's just the start...
  - fapjacks 10y ago
    Yes, a large part of which is the process behind systemd. You're adopting more than just software when you adopt software, and I think investigating what the systemd developers are like is a worthy exercise -- in particular how they approach bugs. I think most people would be surprised to learn what that is like.
    - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
      Ah, yes: When is a bug not a bug? According to the systemd developers, it's when we don't encounter it on our personal machines.
      - fapjacks 10y ago
        ... And also when they can pass the buck to kernel developers, even when it's not a kernel bug.
        digi_owl 10y ago
        Reminds me that i ran into an email chain a while back where the kernel devs pondered forking or taking over udev development because they were tired of power games from the maintainer. This was from back before udev became part of systemd btw.
        qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        Greg-KH is both one of the original developers on udev and a major force behind systemd. He maintains -stable on the linux kernel. So either the kerbel devs did take over udev development...
        digi_owl 10y ago
        I do wonder if the kernel will split between GregKH and T'so once Torvalds steps down. BTW GKH was oddly absent in that thread, and the kernel devs ire was aimed at Sievers...
        qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        Well, GKH is One Of Them. He's less likely to attract their ire, and if he does, at the end of the day, they have to answer to him. But in a fight between GKH and T'so, I'll take T'so. /dev/random's ...interesting design aside, I frankly trust T'so far more than I trust GKH, who backs LP, a person I emphatically do not trust, in a lot of things.

> "Systemd is defective by design." The most succinct explanation of Systemd possible.

by tcoppi 10y ago

> "Systemd is defective by design." The most succinct explanation of Systemd possible.

I've complained a few times that systemd haters havent explained the hate. having read this post I'd say a slightly less succinct but infinitely more informative version would be > "Systemd is defective by design because they totally disregard the fail-safe by design rules"

qwertyuiop924 10y ago
Yes. I wish people would explain their hatred. I understand that there are valid reasons to hate systemd, which is why I avoid it like the plague. But so many people get sucked in by the initial usefulness, and don't see the problems lurking beneath the surface.
- 5ilv3r 10y ago
  Binary only logs was enough for me to hate it.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    That's it? Man that's just the start...
- fapjacks 10y ago
  Yes, a large part of which is the process behind systemd. You're adopting more than just software when you adopt software, and I think investigating what the systemd developers are like is a worthy exercise -- in particular how they approach bugs. I think most people would be surprised to learn what that is like.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Ah, yes: When is a bug not a bug? According to the systemd developers, it's when we don't encounter it on our personal machines.
    - fapjacks 10y ago
      ... And also when they can pass the buck to kernel developers, even when it's not a kernel bug.
      - digi_owl 10y ago
        Reminds me that i ran into an email chain a while back where the kernel devs pondered forking or taking over udev development because they were tired of power games from the maintainer. This was from back before udev became part of systemd btw.
        qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        Greg-KH is both one of the original developers on udev and a major force behind systemd. He maintains -stable on the linux kernel. So either the kerbel devs did take over udev development...
        digi_owl 10y ago
        I do wonder if the kernel will split between GregKH and T'so once Torvalds steps down. BTW GKH was oddly absent in that thread, and the kernel devs ire was aimed at Sievers...
        qwertyuiop924 10y ago
        Well, GKH is One Of Them. He's less likely to attract their ire, and if he does, at the end of the day, they have to answer to him. But in a fight between GKH and T'so, I'll take T'so. /dev/random's ...interesting design aside, I frankly trust T'so far more than I trust GKH, who backs LP, a person I emphatically do not trust, in a lot of things.