6 ms·

Without the amount of changes systemd makes to the operation of a system, at this point it should be thought of as a new operating system that shares a kernel w

by wnoise 7y ago

Without the amount of changes systemd makes to the operation of a system, at this point it should be thought of as a new operating system that shares a kernel with Linux.

pmlnr 7y ago
This is exactly what systemd sceptics have been shouting for years.
throw0101a 7y ago
We're not there yet: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. — Zawinski's Law
- inetknght 7y ago
  All that's missing is a gvfs module to mount your IMAP directories...
  - grawprog 7y ago
    At this point you'd think systemd was trying to catch up with Emacs as the most 'everything but the kitchen sink' of all the software
  - rbanffy 7y ago
    From a UI perspective, this is brilliant. Windows had it with a shell extension that essentially turned Windows Explorer (not IE) into what would later be Outlook Express. It's awful that they opted out of making the desktop Explorer smarter and went the stand-alone application route.
- salawat 7y ago
  Emacs went further. It absorbed systemd. See systemE.
  - Koshkin 7y ago
    Sure, the .emacs script could be just as good an init as any.
theclaw 7y ago
I don’t have a problem with this. I am seeing systemd as a system management layer and as such it makes sense that it should manage as much of the moment-to-moment operation of the system as possible. It seems like a lot of people are upset because it’s a new thing to learn that’s being forced on them by their distro. I used to feel the same way. I’m only a casual linux user and I didn’t want to climb this particular mountain but having learned just a little about it, created some of my own units and played with the tools the sense of alienation dissipated and I was fairly happy with it.
- mondoshawan 7y ago
  I suspect most of us are upset not at learning a new thing, but dealing with brand new bugs in new unexpected ways. Learning a new thing has never really been a problem -- fighting instability in new software has always been the issue. Speaking as a distribution developer, I can say that systemd has bitten me in multiple ways due to upstream bugs that are either ignored or left to rot for quite a while. I've had to resort to patching them, or working around them, which makes things very difficult to live with, especially given the pace of systemd development and feature additions. The older software had a number of bugs, yes, but they were well known and battle tested. In short, it's not "I don't want to learn" -- it's "the new shiny has a slew of unknown bugs we can't easily identify and fix". [edit: removing bits of incendiary text]
  - eikenberry 7y ago
    Older software should always have fewer bugs simply due to maturity. Ie. progress isn't free. The best way to mitigate that is where distros like Debian stable come in. They help gate these developments, releasing more well tested versions of the software and fixing any critical issues that come up with it over the time of the release.
    - mondoshawan 7y ago
      My distribution is based on Debian. Systemd is still a thorn.
  - 7y ago

by wnoise 7y ago

Without the amount of changes systemd makes to the operation of a system, at this point it should be thought of as a new operating system that shares a kernel with Linux.

pmlnr 7y ago

This is exactly what systemd sceptics have been shouting for years.

throw0101a 7y ago

We're not there yet: Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail. — Zawinski's Law

inetknght 7y ago
All that's missing is a gvfs module to mount your IMAP directories...
- grawprog 7y ago
  At this point you'd think systemd was trying to catch up with Emacs as the most 'everything but the kitchen sink' of all the software
- rbanffy 7y ago
  From a UI perspective, this is brilliant. Windows had it with a shell extension that essentially turned Windows Explorer (not IE) into what would later be Outlook Express. It's awful that they opted out of making the desktop Explorer smarter and went the stand-alone application route.
salawat 7y ago
Emacs went further. It absorbed systemd. See systemE.
- Koshkin 7y ago
  Sure, the .emacs script could be just as good an init as any.

theclaw 7y ago

I don’t have a problem with this. I am seeing systemd as a system management layer and as such it makes sense that it should manage as much of the moment-to-moment operation of the system as possible. It seems like a lot of people are upset because it’s a new thing to learn that’s being forced on them by their distro. I used to feel the same way. I’m only a casual linux user and I didn’t want to climb this particular mountain but having learned just a little about it, created some of my own units and played with the tools the sense of alienation dissipated and I was fairly happy with it.

mondoshawan 7y ago
I suspect most of us are upset not at learning a new thing, but dealing with brand new bugs in new unexpected ways. Learning a new thing has never really been a problem -- fighting instability in new software has always been the issue. Speaking as a distribution developer, I can say that systemd has bitten me in multiple ways due to upstream bugs that are either ignored or left to rot for quite a while. I've had to resort to patching them, or working around them, which makes things very difficult to live with, especially given the pace of systemd development and feature additions. The older software had a number of bugs, yes, but they were well known and battle tested. In short, it's not "I don't want to learn" -- it's "the new shiny has a slew of unknown bugs we can't easily identify and fix". [edit: removing bits of incendiary text]
- eikenberry 7y ago
  Older software should always have fewer bugs simply due to maturity. Ie. progress isn't free. The best way to mitigate that is where distros like Debian stable come in. They help gate these developments, releasing more well tested versions of the software and fixing any critical issues that come up with it over the time of the release.
  - mondoshawan 7y ago
    My distribution is based on Debian. Systemd is still a thorn.
- 7y ago