5 ms·

>> That's kind of the point. The goal of systemd is to provide a single, unified, comprehensive Linux platform and undo some of the fragmentation that has occur

by kylek 7y ago

>> That's kind of the point. The goal of systemd is to provide a single, unified, comprehensive Linux platform and undo some of the fragmentation that has occurred in the Linux space between distributions. Huh I guess I hadn't thought of it that way. I've always viewed the "fragmentation" (opinionated differences giving the end-user more choice) between distros as a feature, not a bug. I don't know, I still feel the "systemd or not" choice still comes off a bit ham-handed. But maybe it doesn't matter anymore (considering that all old/big distros that wanted to implement it probably already have, and any new one is free to use it or not). Probably also has to do with the barrier-to-entry of using Linux being far lower than it used to be (maybe in part due to systemd?)

johnny22 7y ago
I think it really depends on what "fragmentatation" is. I think people think different libcs, compilers, DEs are mostly good. I definitely think it is ridiculous though, that I couldn't use something seemingly fundamental like an init script across distros.
- kylek 7y ago
  That's sort of what I meant by the barrier-to-entry comment. Maybe a decade ago one might say: an init script is simple, "anyone" (read: anyone using linux 10 years ago) should be able to throw one together to get something to start. That "anyone" has likely already put in a certain amount of effort to learn some of the grittier parts of the system they're using. Ain't nobody got time for details like that anymore :)
scrollaway 7y ago
> I've always viewed the "fragmentation" (opinionated differences giving the end-user more choice) between distros as a feature, not a bug. I see this opinion quite often and I think it's based far too much on "ancient wisdom" and not actually grounded in reality. Because in practice, the fragmentation has meant that people creating/selling cross-platform desktop apps take one look at linux and think: "Yeah, this isn't worth it". It means a poorer user experience for Linux novices (and even advanced users), because documentation doesn't always match what's on their desktop. They're missing binaries. Arguments are different. Things are implemented differently not even for the sake of being different, but simply because there was no opportunity to reuse the work, so none was reused (and now backwards-compatibility is in the way of changing that). It also means that there's a ridiculous amount of duplicated work between all the distributions. That duplicated work takes a toll on all distributions, which run on limited, usually-volunteer manpower. Those distributions with less manpower, the ones that will actually try new things rather than do something slightly-different, are the ones that are more likely to die. The fragmentation between things that are essentially-the-same creates a higher effort barrier to creating actual new things. systemd is slowly fixing all of this, and thank fuck.
- kylek 7y ago
  I smell what you're steppin' in. It (especially in combination with flatpak/appimage/the-dockerization-of-everything) somewhat protects users from poor decisions that might be made unwittingly by application developers (who, rightfully, should be working on making the best application possible, rather than digging into the brambles of "proper" packaging. For smaller projects with a limited number of maintainers, anyways.) That's all good and well I think. My biggest peeves will always be around its logging and whatever systemd-resolved tries to do.

by kylek 7y ago

johnny22 7y ago

I think it really depends on what "fragmentatation" is. I think people think different libcs, compilers, DEs are mostly good. I definitely think it is ridiculous though, that I couldn't use something seemingly fundamental like an init script across distros.

kylek 7y ago
That's sort of what I meant by the barrier-to-entry comment. Maybe a decade ago one might say: an init script is simple, "anyone" (read: anyone using linux 10 years ago) should be able to throw one together to get something to start. That "anyone" has likely already put in a certain amount of effort to learn some of the grittier parts of the system they're using. Ain't nobody got time for details like that anymore :)

scrollaway 7y ago

> I've always viewed the "fragmentation" (opinionated differences giving the end-user more choice) between distros as a feature, not a bug. I see this opinion quite often and I think it's based far too much on "ancient wisdom" and not actually grounded in reality. Because in practice, the fragmentation has meant that people creating/selling cross-platform desktop apps take one look at linux and think: "Yeah, this isn't worth it". It means a poorer user experience for Linux novices (and even advanced users), because documentation doesn't always match what's on their desktop. They're missing binaries. Arguments are different. Things are implemented differently not even for the sake of being different, but simply because there was no opportunity to reuse the work, so none was reused (and now backwards-compatibility is in the way of changing that). It also means that there's a ridiculous amount of duplicated work between all the distributions. That duplicated work takes a toll on all distributions, which run on limited, usually-volunteer manpower. Those distributions with less manpower, the ones that will actually try new things rather than do something slightly-different, are the ones that are more likely to die. The fragmentation between things that are essentially-the-same creates a higher effort barrier to creating actual new things. systemd is slowly fixing all of this, and thank fuck.

kylek 7y ago
I smell what you're steppin' in. It (especially in combination with flatpak/appimage/the-dockerization-of-everything) somewhat protects users from poor decisions that might be made unwittingly by application developers (who, rightfully, should be working on making the best application possible, rather than digging into the brambles of "proper" packaging. For smaller projects with a limited number of maintainers, anyways.) That's all good and well I think. My biggest peeves will always be around its logging and whatever systemd-resolved tries to do.