6 ms·

"Linux has systemd" and that's why the author didn't select it supposedly. I hear this line of thought from people that use FreeBSD often, although I suspect if

"Linux has systemd" and that's why the author didn't select it supposedly. I hear this line of thought from people that use FreeBSD often, although I suspect if you ask many of those people why systemd is so horrible you won't actually hear a legitimate (and still relevant) reason from them. I suggest anyone that thinks systemd is terrible and doesn't spend lots of time in Linux to watch this presentation by Benno Rice. https://youtu.be/o_AIw9bGogo https://youtu.be/o_AIw9bGogo

nix23 6y ago
>I hear this line of thought from people that use FreeBSD often That's BS and you know it.
ysleepy 6y ago
Ever used systemd-timesyncd or the systemd-dhcp thing, oh and systemd-resolved ? All these inferior implementations are barely configurable and lack features for use-cases outside of desktop users. The init system is nice, but why the hell does it re-implement svchost.exe
- d21d3q 6y ago
  I did. I've been maintaining python+ncurses tool for configuring system: network, ntp, etc. If you don't have dhcp server running on your network, then ifup will block until it resolves address (ui freeze). If not, then you have to kill it and also dhcp reolver. After switching to systemd-networkd it just works in background. All configuration is done with .ini style files so that no need to use special parser for /etc/network/interfaces. Disclaimer: I jumped on linux few years ago when systemd already had some momentum, so that I wasn't used to either init or systemd. I found the later easier to pick up.
- chmln 6y ago
  All of these are optional, just disable and use an alternative? I use resolved and timesyncd however and they work amazing for my basic needs on the laptop.
- 1_player 6y ago
  systemd-resolved is inferior to what? It's the only DNS system on Linux that can handle LLMNS + split-DNS (i.e. a VPN and your LAN running alongside each other) + DNS-over-HTTPS correctly. Sure it's a pain in the arse to configure correctly, but it's more featureful than NetworkManager. systemd-timesyncd is inferior to what? a fully fledged ntpd? go ahead, use that if you really need to, but on 99% of Linux machines systemd-timesyncd is enough.
gorgoiler 6y ago
Charitably, this feels like a good presentation if you are already sold on the idea. Realistically, it’s pretty snarky and unconvincing to all but the choir to whom he preaches.
antranigv 6y ago
author here! I'm not against the "concept" of systemd, I think the BSDs need a "system" layer as well, just not systemd. The ideas are amazing, the implementation is the problem.
devenblake 6y ago
> Linux has systemd, not my favorite thing out there, Windows is privacy nightmare. That left me with 2 major options: Linuxes without systemd (Gentoo, in my case) or BSDs. Even if you don't like systemd (I don't but I live with it because I never have to interact with it anyway), this is such a weird way to phrase it. Imagine saying "Linux has `apt`, not my favorite thing out there. That left me with two major options: Linuxes without apt (Arch, in my case) or BSDs." Just... change the program. Apparently Arch can switch over to sysvinit just by installing two packages from the AUR (see https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/SysVinit https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/SysVinit), Devuan exists, et cetera. Of course, the author was sold on BSD before making this argument - and fair enough, at least it's a free system. But in my opinion it's ridiculous to discount a family of systems because of one common program.
toast0 6y ago
My basic dislike for systemd is it a large change to the overall system, and doesn't provide me any benefits that I can tell. Beyond that, I've experienced or read about many negative things. a) I ran into an issue with changes in startup scripts in Debian which meant I could no longer hit ctrl-c to stop network initialization on a laptop when it couldn't get a dhcp lease (it was either not connecting well to wifi , or trying to get a lease on a disconnected wired NIC; it was a while ago, I don't quite remember) b) there have been many secuirty issues in systemd and systemd-* utilities. Quite a few of which were repeats of issues existing daemons had been through, that shouldn't have been repeated. c) I have read that in default configurations a user's programs will be terminated after the user logs out; that's not acceptable for me, and a large change in default behavior For me, systemd is yet another churny subsystem that drives aggrivation, so since I was already exposed to FreeBSD through work, it made sense to me to go in that direction at home, instead of sticking with Debian and accepting systemd.

nix23 6y ago

>I hear this line of thought from people that use FreeBSD often That's BS and you know it.

ysleepy 6y ago

Ever used systemd-timesyncd or the systemd-dhcp thing, oh and systemd-resolved ? All these inferior implementations are barely configurable and lack features for use-cases outside of desktop users. The init system is nice, but why the hell does it re-implement svchost.exe

d21d3q 6y ago
I did. I've been maintaining python+ncurses tool for configuring system: network, ntp, etc. If you don't have dhcp server running on your network, then ifup will block until it resolves address (ui freeze). If not, then you have to kill it and also dhcp reolver. After switching to systemd-networkd it just works in background. All configuration is done with .ini style files so that no need to use special parser for /etc/network/interfaces. Disclaimer: I jumped on linux few years ago when systemd already had some momentum, so that I wasn't used to either init or systemd. I found the later easier to pick up.
chmln 6y ago
All of these are optional, just disable and use an alternative? I use resolved and timesyncd however and they work amazing for my basic needs on the laptop.
1_player 6y ago
systemd-resolved is inferior to what? It's the only DNS system on Linux that can handle LLMNS + split-DNS (i.e. a VPN and your LAN running alongside each other) + DNS-over-HTTPS correctly. Sure it's a pain in the arse to configure correctly, but it's more featureful than NetworkManager. systemd-timesyncd is inferior to what? a fully fledged ntpd? go ahead, use that if you really need to, but on 99% of Linux machines systemd-timesyncd is enough.

gorgoiler 6y ago

Charitably, this feels like a good presentation if you are already sold on the idea. Realistically, it’s pretty snarky and unconvincing to all but the choir to whom he preaches.

antranigv 6y ago

author here! I'm not against the "concept" of systemd, I think the BSDs need a "system" layer as well, just not systemd. The ideas are amazing, the implementation is the problem.

devenblake 6y ago

> Linux has systemd, not my favorite thing out there, Windows is privacy nightmare. That left me with 2 major options: Linuxes without systemd (Gentoo, in my case) or BSDs. Even if you don't like systemd (I don't but I live with it because I never have to interact with it anyway), this is such a weird way to phrase it. Imagine saying "Linux has `apt`, not my favorite thing out there. That left me with two major options: Linuxes without apt (Arch, in my case) or BSDs." Just... change the program. Apparently Arch can switch over to sysvinit just by installing two packages from the AUR (see https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/SysVinit https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/SysVinit), Devuan exists, et cetera. Of course, the author was sold on BSD before making this argument - and fair enough, at least it's a free system. But in my opinion it's ridiculous to discount a family of systems because of one common program.

toast0 6y ago

My basic dislike for systemd is it a large change to the overall system, and doesn't provide me any benefits that I can tell. Beyond that, I've experienced or read about many negative things. a) I ran into an issue with changes in startup scripts in Debian which meant I could no longer hit ctrl-c to stop network initialization on a laptop when it couldn't get a dhcp lease (it was either not connecting well to wifi , or trying to get a lease on a disconnected wired NIC; it was a while ago, I don't quite remember) b) there have been many secuirty issues in systemd and systemd-* utilities. Quite a few of which were repeats of issues existing daemons had been through, that shouldn't have been repeated. c) I have read that in default configurations a user's programs will be terminated after the user logs out; that's not acceptable for me, and a large change in default behavior For me, systemd is yet another churny subsystem that drives aggrivation, so since I was already exposed to FreeBSD through work, it made sense to me to go in that direction at home, instead of sticking with Debian and accepting systemd.