4 ms·

I don't have enough long-term Linux experience to understand why systemd is so hated... All of my recent experience has been with Debian Stretch which I think u

by amanzi 8y ago

I don't have enough long-term Linux experience to understand why systemd is so hated... All of my recent experience has been with Debian Stretch which I think uses systemd by default, and I don't see any obvious issues with it.

_emacsomancer_ 8y ago
systemd is fine until it isn't. On my systems with systemd inits, whenever there's a problem, systemd is always involved somehow. [I had a cute one where a daemon (emacs, actually) set to start-up on boot with systemd ended up failing, which somehow caused the rest of the systemd modules to fail, with all of the modules failing silently (so the systemd tools themselves didn't tell me anything about failed units).]
api 8y ago
The original SystemV init was ugly and hairy. Systemd managed to replace it with something more counter-intuitive and obtuse. That took effort. "systemctl list-units" What's wrong with? "systemctl list" or "systemctl units" or "systemctl ls" ? Then there's the output, which is borderline unreadable. The entire systemd design is like this. It seems like it's designed by people who enjoy arcane hard to read and hard to type stuff. I can never, ever remember the magic incantations required to get it to load a new unit file. I can also never recall where they go without Googling and it seems to vary across distributions. People always joke that the first step to doing anything with git is to Google it. Systemd is worse since its commands are bizarre and non-memorable. Over the years I've grown to hate intentionally arcane software. It wastes your time to no benefit. I tolerate git because it's powerful and it does have rational reasons for how it does things, but systemd is just annoying.
- fulafel 8y ago
  I think "systemd came and replaced sysvinit" is a winner-written history. There are/were other strong alternatives to sysvinit and eg in Debian it was a close race.
  - JdeBP 8y ago
    It's one of the fallacies called out by the Uselessd Guy. * http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ It's also an outright ahistorical falsehood in the case of Fedora and Ubuntu.
paulddraper 8y ago
Why do we have ulimit and systemd? When should I use which to control system resouces?

by amanzi 8y ago

_emacsomancer_ 8y ago

systemd is fine until it isn't. On my systems with systemd inits, whenever there's a problem, systemd is always involved somehow. [I had a cute one where a daemon (emacs, actually) set to start-up on boot with systemd ended up failing, which somehow caused the rest of the systemd modules to fail, with all of the modules failing silently (so the systemd tools themselves didn't tell me anything about failed units).]

api 8y ago

The original SystemV init was ugly and hairy. Systemd managed to replace it with something more counter-intuitive and obtuse. That took effort. "systemctl list-units" What's wrong with? "systemctl list" or "systemctl units" or "systemctl ls" ? Then there's the output, which is borderline unreadable. The entire systemd design is like this. It seems like it's designed by people who enjoy arcane hard to read and hard to type stuff. I can never, ever remember the magic incantations required to get it to load a new unit file. I can also never recall where they go without Googling and it seems to vary across distributions. People always joke that the first step to doing anything with git is to Google it. Systemd is worse since its commands are bizarre and non-memorable. Over the years I've grown to hate intentionally arcane software. It wastes your time to no benefit. I tolerate git because it's powerful and it does have rational reasons for how it does things, but systemd is just annoying.

fulafel 8y ago
I think "systemd came and replaced sysvinit" is a winner-written history. There are/were other strong alternatives to sysvinit and eg in Debian it was a close race.
- JdeBP 8y ago
  It's one of the fallacies called out by the Uselessd Guy. * http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ http://uselessd.darknedgy.net/ProSystemdAntiSystemd/ It's also an outright ahistorical falsehood in the case of Fedora and Ubuntu.

paulddraper 8y ago

Why do we have ulimit and systemd? When should I use which to control system resouces?