3 ms·

I am eager to try this out. As a self-taught developer, I'm in a big turtles-all-the-way-down phase and I feel learning the ins-and-outs of Linux will give me i

I am eager to try this out. As a self-taught developer, I'm in a big turtles-all-the-way-down phase and I feel learning the ins-and-outs of Linux will give me intellectual satisfaction. I would appreciate some thoughts on whether to go by the systemd route or the non-systemd route. The pros and cons.

ghthor 6y ago
Do non systemd, then do systemd
- _huayra_ 6y ago
  Is it possible to do the systemd book and then non-systemd? I did the systemd one a few weeks ago and I think that besides a few small affordances for some systemd quirk, the main issue was installing all the prereqs for building systemd (namely meson, ninja, which openrc probably doesn't require). They give a nifty tar command to snapshot the disk, which could help create a "fork point" for the setup. `pixz` is very helpful addition in this case (e.g. `tar -cp $LFS | pixz -9 > my_backup.tar.xz`)
  - tinus_hn 6y ago
    If you install to a VM most also have snapshot features you can use.
- whytaka 6y ago
  Thank you. Could you also tell me why you suggest this? I'm genuinely curious.
CameronNemo 6y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by the ins and outs of Linux. I assume you mean the userspace plumbing rather than the kernel? In any case, I would only go the systemd route if it is what you want to learn. Otherwise just use runit -- much simpler and probably a bit easier to bootstrap. That leaves you time and energy to spend on other areas.
- whytaka 6y ago
  I would like have some proficient understanding over the architecture of Linux. Both in terms of how the kernel works, and how everything is configured up to userspace. I'm inclined to go the systemd route because I use it myself regularly, but I also understand that systemd is a bit of a monolithic piece within Linux. I suspected that it might hide a lot of things that used to be more discrete and manual (but more unix-y).
nurettin 6y ago
It's not like you will be up to your neck trying to set up dozens of services in LFS, is it? I mean does the choice really matter?
- whytaka 6y ago
  My concern is in how much systemd does as a management layer in Linux. I feel that it might hide a lot of internal details that were more explicit before systemd.

ghthor 6y ago

Do non systemd, then do systemd

_huayra_ 6y ago
Is it possible to do the systemd book and then non-systemd? I did the systemd one a few weeks ago and I think that besides a few small affordances for some systemd quirk, the main issue was installing all the prereqs for building systemd (namely meson, ninja, which openrc probably doesn't require). They give a nifty tar command to snapshot the disk, which could help create a "fork point" for the setup. `pixz` is very helpful addition in this case (e.g. `tar -cp $LFS | pixz -9 > my_backup.tar.xz`)
- tinus_hn 6y ago
  If you install to a VM most also have snapshot features you can use.
whytaka 6y ago
Thank you. Could you also tell me why you suggest this? I'm genuinely curious.

CameronNemo 6y ago

I'm not sure what you mean by the ins and outs of Linux. I assume you mean the userspace plumbing rather than the kernel? In any case, I would only go the systemd route if it is what you want to learn. Otherwise just use runit -- much simpler and probably a bit easier to bootstrap. That leaves you time and energy to spend on other areas.

whytaka 6y ago
I would like have some proficient understanding over the architecture of Linux. Both in terms of how the kernel works, and how everything is configured up to userspace. I'm inclined to go the systemd route because I use it myself regularly, but I also understand that systemd is a bit of a monolithic piece within Linux. I suspected that it might hide a lot of things that used to be more discrete and manual (but more unix-y).

nurettin 6y ago

It's not like you will be up to your neck trying to set up dozens of services in LFS, is it? I mean does the choice really matter?

whytaka 6y ago
My concern is in how much systemd does as a management layer in Linux. I feel that it might hide a lot of internal details that were more explicit before systemd.