6 ms·

So he closes with > Unfortunately, the lock-in they're creating will deprive people of the ability to vote with their feet and switch to better alternatives.

So he closes with > Unfortunately, the lock-in they're creating will deprive people of the ability to vote with their feet and switch to better alternatives. This might sound like a dumb question, and I'm not saying I agree with him, but if I did, I'd vote with my feet by... what? Don't most distros use it now? I'm genuinely curious if this is a practical option for me, though I'm not likely to do it.

ktRolster 10y ago
Reports are that Devuan works fine. Gentoo reportedly works well, and then there's my favorite distro (for other reasons besides systemd), Slackware.
- LoneWolf 10y ago
  As a Gentoo user I can confirm it works well without systemd, using openrc, you can use systemd on Gentoo if you want, I personally avoid it.
  - jpgvm 10y ago
    As an upside OpenRC is simpler and even more configurable than systemd whilst being almost as fast, having had dependency based boot since before systemd was conceived.
    - LoneWolf 10y ago
      Wait does it mean other init systems did not have dependency based boot? I have always been a Gentoo user so always used OpenRC, if that's the case it explains why I never understood why systemd was so "revolutionary". I do find it harder to configure and understand than OpenRC, after I edit some configurations I can just restart the service and it's working, with systemd I have to run more than one command and they are not intuitive at all.
      - digi_owl 10y ago
        There have been quite a few. But until Ubuntu introduced Upstart, and i am sure someone will claim it was not dependency based, few if any reached mainstream usage. Keep in mind that RHEL6 actually use Upstart as pid1, but you would not guess it as Upstart deals with sysv rc "just fine". Thing is that systemd is lead by some of the most myopic developers in the Linux community. If is not in use by RHEL or Fedora it does not exist. End result is a litany of NIH projects that could have been avoided had they looked around just a little bit.
        jpgvm 10y ago
        Upstart is not actually dependency based, it's event based. Which is similar but not exactly the same. It's worth mentioning that the -idea- of systemd if limited to replacing pid 1 with a more reasonable system and something akin to unit files is an excellent one and would be an improvement on OpenRC. Sadly as many have noted systemd come with a lot of very very bad side effects..
  - lottin 10y ago
    The init system is easily replaceable. The problem is things like polkit, which now depend on systemd (logind).
    - LoneWolf 10y ago
      I do have polkit installed, there is an use flag "systemd" that I have disabled and so far I had no problems, it keeps systemd away from my system, and everything works.
- onli 10y ago
  Another alternative is Funtoo, a (soft) Gentoo fork, with additional integrated means to keep systemd away.
skywhopper 10y ago
I guess that's his point. You don't have many realistic options.
- blakesterz 10y ago
  Yeah, that's why I'm wondering. As someone above mentioned, I could switch to FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Illumos, etc... but jumping from Ubuntu to those don't seem very realistic given the limits on time.
  - anonbanker 10y ago
    Ubuntu users should switch to Calculate Linux or Slax.
semi-extrinsic 10y ago
I've gone systemd-free on Arch Linux, no problems so far.
- arthulia 10y ago
  configuring freshly installed packages must be a pain
  - semi-extrinsic 10y ago
    How so?
    - arthulia 10y ago
      because presumably they'd be missing init scripts...
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  Anyone care to explain the downvoting of a simple factual statement? Are the systemd fans angry that other options are viable? For anyone else wanting to completely purge systemd from an Arch install, here is a good and thorough description; takes less than one hour to switch if you read it thoroughly, about ten minutes if you just do as it says in the code listings. http://systemd-free.org http://systemd-free.org
kinghajj 10y ago
Perhaps systemd should be specified as an API, with a test suite, so that there could be multiple independent implementations that compete for mindshare?
- wmf 10y ago
  The API/architecture is what people object to so giving them more implementations won't help. And there aren't enough people to maintain existing init systems so creating more unmaintained software isn't a good idea.
  - mixedCase 10y ago
    >The API/architecture is what people object to so giving them more implementations won't help. Not really. The majority of the people I've discussed the subject with and myself agree that the problem is not so much the architecture, as it seems to be somewhat decoupled and merely needs a little push. The problem is the APIs are unstable and writing an implementation is pure hell. Systemd does some pretty great stuff, it's just that the APIs need to settle down a bit and be tiered into feature sets. Mind you, I have read very little systemd code, there could be way more tight coupling than what I believe there is. It would be good for a dev to chime in.
Sanddancer 10y ago
FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Illumos, etc. Chances are, you don't even need to tie yourself to the Linux kernel. Lots of OSes out there that don't inflict their users with systemd.
- mlacks 10y ago
  Thanks for mentioning illumos, I love running it. I'm having a great time with Joyent running a Ghost instance for my blog
- gribbly 10y ago
  If you don't like systemd due to it being a lock-in, why on earth would you go with the BSD's who are all lock-in's with their respective implementations of lower-level plumbing which systemd is trying to standardize across Linux ?
  - empthought 10y ago
    I think people don't like systemd because it (in their view) has major flaws, and the lock-in prevents other systems from being tried.
  - Sanddancer 10y ago
    The BSDs have far less lock-in with the default components than Linux distributions usually do. For example, I dislike the default syslog daemon, so, I disabled the default, and used my own. This involved adding two lines to /etc/rc.conf -- syslog_ng_enable="YES" syslogd_enable="NO" and that was it. Unlike systemd's way of doing it, the default syslog facility isn't started at all, doesn't run, period. Pretty much all the other low level services -- crond, dhcpd, ntpd, etc -- are the same way. This is one of the many failings as to how systemd operates. One should have reasonable defaults, but at the same time, if the defaults don't work, it should be easy to change them.
    - gribbly 10y ago
      Well, journald is pretty much the one component of systemd that is very difficult to replace, but even so you can easily forward to another syslog daemon of your choice. As for the rest, it's very much the same as with the BSD's, they all support their own versions of low level components and only them, and these can be changed by the user with compatible tools of their choice.
astrodust 10y ago
There's nothing stopping you from writing a drop-in systemd replacement in Rust or something that's easier to write safe code for.
- thinkpad20 10y ago
  I would love for such a thing (and have thought about doing it myself). But as systemd's capabilities grow more and more expansive, and with its lack of modularity, it becomes harder and harder to write a replacement for it. Of course, even replacing only a piece of systemd's functionality (for example its process manager) would still be beneficial, but systemd would continue to be the only real choice for many.
  - astrodust 10y ago
    The way you overthrow an overlord you no longer like is by knuckling down, working hard, kicking out a replacement. This is how LibreSSL came around (http://libressl.org http://libressl.org). There's nothing especially wrong with the idea of systemd or the way it's been deployed, but if the code-base is suffering from neglect one way to fix that is to either support the core team, or barring that due to hostility, fork and/or make a work-alike.
    - anonbanker 10y ago
      we don't want a work-alike. systemd is not necessary, as all the shims for other platforms will attest.
      - astrodust 10y ago
        You don't. Other people want systemd to work, to be improved, and to move things forward.
- evilDagmar 10y ago
  I would suggest that simple common sense might prevent such a thing. It's not without reason that the older, wider heads always kept initd simple, in part to prevent it becoming an unnavigable monstrosity. The very idea of the "legacy" init implementations creating files, let alone suid root files, is laughable.
upofadown 10y ago
Void It is interesting for more than just the use of runit...
anonbanker 10y ago
> Don't most distros use it now? I'd submit that, in order to use systemd, you must have to give up the term "distro" to describe yourself. With that in mind, there are only 5 distributions left: 1) Devuan 2) Slackware (including Slax) 3) Void Linux 4) Gentoo (including Calculate Linux) 5) systemd If you wanted to vote with your feet, and wanted to keep .deb compatability, you'd move to Devuan. Otherwise, there are four other choices, two of which have LiveCD/LiveUSB install options.

ktRolster 10y ago

Reports are that Devuan works fine. Gentoo reportedly works well, and then there's my favorite distro (for other reasons besides systemd), Slackware.

LoneWolf 10y ago
As a Gentoo user I can confirm it works well without systemd, using openrc, you can use systemd on Gentoo if you want, I personally avoid it.
- jpgvm 10y ago
  As an upside OpenRC is simpler and even more configurable than systemd whilst being almost as fast, having had dependency based boot since before systemd was conceived.
  - LoneWolf 10y ago
    Wait does it mean other init systems did not have dependency based boot? I have always been a Gentoo user so always used OpenRC, if that's the case it explains why I never understood why systemd was so "revolutionary". I do find it harder to configure and understand than OpenRC, after I edit some configurations I can just restart the service and it's working, with systemd I have to run more than one command and they are not intuitive at all.
    - digi_owl 10y ago
      There have been quite a few. But until Ubuntu introduced Upstart, and i am sure someone will claim it was not dependency based, few if any reached mainstream usage. Keep in mind that RHEL6 actually use Upstart as pid1, but you would not guess it as Upstart deals with sysv rc "just fine". Thing is that systemd is lead by some of the most myopic developers in the Linux community. If is not in use by RHEL or Fedora it does not exist. End result is a litany of NIH projects that could have been avoided had they looked around just a little bit.
      - jpgvm 10y ago
        Upstart is not actually dependency based, it's event based. Which is similar but not exactly the same. It's worth mentioning that the -idea- of systemd if limited to replacing pid 1 with a more reasonable system and something akin to unit files is an excellent one and would be an improvement on OpenRC. Sadly as many have noted systemd come with a lot of very very bad side effects..
- lottin 10y ago
  The init system is easily replaceable. The problem is things like polkit, which now depend on systemd (logind).
  - LoneWolf 10y ago
    I do have polkit installed, there is an use flag "systemd" that I have disabled and so far I had no problems, it keeps systemd away from my system, and everything works.
onli 10y ago
Another alternative is Funtoo, a (soft) Gentoo fork, with additional integrated means to keep systemd away.

skywhopper 10y ago

I guess that's his point. You don't have many realistic options.

blakesterz 10y ago
Yeah, that's why I'm wondering. As someone above mentioned, I could switch to FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Illumos, etc... but jumping from Ubuntu to those don't seem very realistic given the limits on time.
- anonbanker 10y ago
  Ubuntu users should switch to Calculate Linux or Slax.

semi-extrinsic 10y ago

I've gone systemd-free on Arch Linux, no problems so far.

arthulia 10y ago
configuring freshly installed packages must be a pain
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago
  How so?
  - arthulia 10y ago
    because presumably they'd be missing init scripts...
semi-extrinsic 10y ago
Anyone care to explain the downvoting of a simple factual statement? Are the systemd fans angry that other options are viable? For anyone else wanting to completely purge systemd from an Arch install, here is a good and thorough description; takes less than one hour to switch if you read it thoroughly, about ten minutes if you just do as it says in the code listings. http://systemd-free.org http://systemd-free.org

kinghajj 10y ago

Perhaps systemd should be specified as an API, with a test suite, so that there could be multiple independent implementations that compete for mindshare?

wmf 10y ago
The API/architecture is what people object to so giving them more implementations won't help. And there aren't enough people to maintain existing init systems so creating more unmaintained software isn't a good idea.
- mixedCase 10y ago
  >The API/architecture is what people object to so giving them more implementations won't help. Not really. The majority of the people I've discussed the subject with and myself agree that the problem is not so much the architecture, as it seems to be somewhat decoupled and merely needs a little push. The problem is the APIs are unstable and writing an implementation is pure hell. Systemd does some pretty great stuff, it's just that the APIs need to settle down a bit and be tiered into feature sets. Mind you, I have read very little systemd code, there could be way more tight coupling than what I believe there is. It would be good for a dev to chime in.

Sanddancer 10y ago

FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Illumos, etc. Chances are, you don't even need to tie yourself to the Linux kernel. Lots of OSes out there that don't inflict their users with systemd.

mlacks 10y ago
Thanks for mentioning illumos, I love running it. I'm having a great time with Joyent running a Ghost instance for my blog
gribbly 10y ago
If you don't like systemd due to it being a lock-in, why on earth would you go with the BSD's who are all lock-in's with their respective implementations of lower-level plumbing which systemd is trying to standardize across Linux ?
- empthought 10y ago
  I think people don't like systemd because it (in their view) has major flaws, and the lock-in prevents other systems from being tried.
- Sanddancer 10y ago
  The BSDs have far less lock-in with the default components than Linux distributions usually do. For example, I dislike the default syslog daemon, so, I disabled the default, and used my own. This involved adding two lines to /etc/rc.conf -- syslog_ng_enable="YES" syslogd_enable="NO" and that was it. Unlike systemd's way of doing it, the default syslog facility isn't started at all, doesn't run, period. Pretty much all the other low level services -- crond, dhcpd, ntpd, etc -- are the same way. This is one of the many failings as to how systemd operates. One should have reasonable defaults, but at the same time, if the defaults don't work, it should be easy to change them.
  - gribbly 10y ago
    Well, journald is pretty much the one component of systemd that is very difficult to replace, but even so you can easily forward to another syslog daemon of your choice. As for the rest, it's very much the same as with the BSD's, they all support their own versions of low level components and only them, and these can be changed by the user with compatible tools of their choice.

astrodust 10y ago

There's nothing stopping you from writing a drop-in systemd replacement in Rust or something that's easier to write safe code for.

thinkpad20 10y ago
I would love for such a thing (and have thought about doing it myself). But as systemd's capabilities grow more and more expansive, and with its lack of modularity, it becomes harder and harder to write a replacement for it. Of course, even replacing only a piece of systemd's functionality (for example its process manager) would still be beneficial, but systemd would continue to be the only real choice for many.
- astrodust 10y ago
  The way you overthrow an overlord you no longer like is by knuckling down, working hard, kicking out a replacement. This is how LibreSSL came around (http://libressl.org http://libressl.org). There's nothing especially wrong with the idea of systemd or the way it's been deployed, but if the code-base is suffering from neglect one way to fix that is to either support the core team, or barring that due to hostility, fork and/or make a work-alike.
  - anonbanker 10y ago
    we don't want a work-alike. systemd is not necessary, as all the shims for other platforms will attest.
    - astrodust 10y ago
      You don't. Other people want systemd to work, to be improved, and to move things forward.
evilDagmar 10y ago
I would suggest that simple common sense might prevent such a thing. It's not without reason that the older, wider heads always kept initd simple, in part to prevent it becoming an unnavigable monstrosity. The very idea of the "legacy" init implementations creating files, let alone suid root files, is laughable.

upofadown 10y ago

Void It is interesting for more than just the use of runit...

anonbanker 10y ago

> Don't most distros use it now? I'd submit that, in order to use systemd, you must have to give up the term "distro" to describe yourself. With that in mind, there are only 5 distributions left: 1) Devuan 2) Slackware (including Slax) 3) Void Linux 4) Gentoo (including Calculate Linux) 5) systemd If you wanted to vote with your feet, and wanted to keep .deb compatability, you'd move to Devuan. Otherwise, there are four other choices, two of which have LiveCD/LiveUSB install options.