5 ms·

If we're not afraid of change, Let's change away from systemd.

by yarrel 7y ago

lykr0n 7y ago
To what?
- msbarnett 7y ago
  RunIt, say.
  - Zancarius 7y ago
    I suspect the OP is referencing Void Linux[1] which makes use of runit as its init system. If not, it's the first thing that came to mind. I'm not sure it's necessarily a better solution as it requires more manual interaction out of the box (namely creating symlinks by hand among other duties), but that might be argued as a feature. There appears to be a wrapper or two out there to automate away some of the tedium. [1] https://voidlinux.org/ https://voidlinux.org/
- bugbug99 7y ago
  s9
  - castis 7y ago
    What should someone google in order to find out more about this? (i tried, i got lots of information about the samsung phone, even with -samsung and various incantations of 'init', 'processes', 'linux', etc)
    - yyyk 7y ago
      I think the OP meant s6 and not s9. runit, s6 and also nosh are all daemontool-style init systems, which have a somewhat different idea how to do things than systemd all, but all are inspired by the original daemontools package. s6 and nosh have decent overviews: https://skarnet.org/software/s6/ https://skarnet.org/software/s6/ https://jdebp.eu/Softwares/nosh/guide/introduction.html https://jdebp.eu/Softwares/nosh/guide/introduction.html The original daemontools: https://cr.yp.to/daemontools/faq/create.html#why https://cr.yp.to/daemontools/faq/create.html#why I'll let others decide whether these are better or worse than systemd. I go with whatever my distro would give me, since picking a different init system is too much work...
ultraism 7y ago
There was a switch away from SysV init for particular reasons, not change for the sake of change.
- geggam 7y ago
  You know, everyone says this but every server I worked on (several thousands) which used sysvinit I cant remember any issues with startups that couldn't easily be scripted around. I still dont understand what issues are fixed with systemd and I am aware of many it has created.
  - Someone 7y ago
    I am not convinced every sysadmin could ‘easily’ script around init issues on the servers they manage, but I’ll give you that. The real issue isn’t with servers, it’s with desktop systems and laptops. When users plug in a USB sound card or plug their laptop into a dock, they don’t want to (and likely couldn’t) “easily script around” that; they expect an audio device, network connection, video card to be created without any user intervention, and go away when devices get unplugged. Making a set of init scripts (and surrounding unload and reload scripts) robust against insertion and removal of any of many different devices isn’t easy even for init script gurus, and would lead to duplicated code for detecting and handling the various load/unload conditions. That, I think is the primary reason Apple went with launchd. Systemd took that idea. There’s nothing wrong with that. The main issues with systemd, IMO are a) initially it was buggy, and b) tremendous scope creep.
    - geggam 7y ago
      >The real issue isn’t with servers, it’s with desktop systems and laptops. When users plug in a USB sound card or plug their laptop into a dock, they don’t want to (and likely couldn’t) “easily script around” that; they expect an audio device, network connection, video card to be created without any user intervention, and go away when devices get unplugged. Bingo ! Folks who know, and I mean really understand how to run servers know how to script init. Folks who use Linux on the laptop / Admin Ubuntu do not and systemd makes them able to do stuff "most of the time" There is no reason to force systemd as the default for servers. You dont plug things into servers and in fact you dont want some service monitoring servers so someone can stick something in a server and start rooting around it.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

If we're not afraid of change, Let's change away from systemd.

by yarrel 7y ago

If we're not afraid of change, Let's change away from systemd.

lykr0n 7y ago

To what?

msbarnett 7y ago
RunIt, say.
- Zancarius 7y ago
  I suspect the OP is referencing Void Linux[1] which makes use of runit as its init system. If not, it's the first thing that came to mind. I'm not sure it's necessarily a better solution as it requires more manual interaction out of the box (namely creating symlinks by hand among other duties), but that might be argued as a feature. There appears to be a wrapper or two out there to automate away some of the tedium. [1] https://voidlinux.org/ https://voidlinux.org/
bugbug99 7y ago
s9
- castis 7y ago
  What should someone google in order to find out more about this? (i tried, i got lots of information about the samsung phone, even with -samsung and various incantations of 'init', 'processes', 'linux', etc)
  - yyyk 7y ago
    I think the OP meant s6 and not s9. runit, s6 and also nosh are all daemontool-style init systems, which have a somewhat different idea how to do things than systemd all, but all are inspired by the original daemontools package. s6 and nosh have decent overviews: https://skarnet.org/software/s6/ https://skarnet.org/software/s6/ https://jdebp.eu/Softwares/nosh/guide/introduction.html https://jdebp.eu/Softwares/nosh/guide/introduction.html The original daemontools: https://cr.yp.to/daemontools/faq/create.html#why https://cr.yp.to/daemontools/faq/create.html#why I'll let others decide whether these are better or worse than systemd. I go with whatever my distro would give me, since picking a different init system is too much work...

ultraism 7y ago

There was a switch away from SysV init for particular reasons, not change for the sake of change.

geggam 7y ago
You know, everyone says this but every server I worked on (several thousands) which used sysvinit I cant remember any issues with startups that couldn't easily be scripted around. I still dont understand what issues are fixed with systemd and I am aware of many it has created.
- Someone 7y ago
  I am not convinced every sysadmin could ‘easily’ script around init issues on the servers they manage, but I’ll give you that. The real issue isn’t with servers, it’s with desktop systems and laptops. When users plug in a USB sound card or plug their laptop into a dock, they don’t want to (and likely couldn’t) “easily script around” that; they expect an audio device, network connection, video card to be created without any user intervention, and go away when devices get unplugged. Making a set of init scripts (and surrounding unload and reload scripts) robust against insertion and removal of any of many different devices isn’t easy even for init script gurus, and would lead to duplicated code for detecting and handling the various load/unload conditions. That, I think is the primary reason Apple went with launchd. Systemd took that idea. There’s nothing wrong with that. The main issues with systemd, IMO are a) initially it was buggy, and b) tremendous scope creep.
  - geggam 7y ago
    >The real issue isn’t with servers, it’s with desktop systems and laptops. When users plug in a USB sound card or plug their laptop into a dock, they don’t want to (and likely couldn’t) “easily script around” that; they expect an audio device, network connection, video card to be created without any user intervention, and go away when devices get unplugged. Bingo ! Folks who know, and I mean really understand how to run servers know how to script init. Folks who use Linux on the laptop / Admin Ubuntu do not and systemd makes them able to do stuff "most of the time" There is no reason to force systemd as the default for servers. You dont plug things into servers and in fact you dont want some service monitoring servers so someone can stick something in a server and start rooting around it.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]