7 ms·

Every time I see all the stuff packed into it I feel extreme urge to switch to freebsd again. Oomd, oh yea, good idea, but WHY it has to be in systemd? The sam

by hexo 6y ago

Every time I see all the stuff packed into it I feel extreme urge to switch to freebsd again. Oomd, oh yea, good idea, but WHY it has to be in systemd? The same applies to about 3/4 of things in there. Because of this i've started to call it LennartOS. And also I don't feel like linux is about freedom anymore but more like some sort of weird power display games.

Gaelan 6y ago
You're concerned about a project gaining too many features, so you… move to FreeBSD, an OS where everything is developed as one project?
edoceo 6y ago
Come to Gentoo! I've been booting with OpenRC since forever have have completely ignored the systemd drama. The only thing eating my userspace is me.
- disposekinetics 6y ago
  I can second this, recent Gentoo has been a pleasure to work with.
  - mrlonglong 6y ago
    You can use Gnome 3 without systemd. Biggest plus point about Gentoo. Love it to bits even if it gives me headaches sometimes !
cmeacham98 6y ago
This is a common mistake. systemd-oomd is not "in" systemd the init system. Similar to systemd-resolved, systemd-networkd, systemd-boot, and others it just has the systemd name because it is developed by the systemd team. A minimal system using sytemd for the init system and other software for everything else only needs sytemd, dbus, and journald. I use several of these projects because I like the systemd design philosophy (ex the way the CLI interface and config files are) and trust the developers of their software. However, there are popular altenatives available for all of these components, should you choose to use them: systemd-resolved: bind9, dnsmasq, powerdns systemd-networkd: NetworkManager, ConnMan systemd-boot: GRUB2, Refind, EFISTUB systemd-oomd: earlyoom, nohang, oomd (the facebook one, not systemd)
- hexo 6y ago
  This is exactly my problem. It is made by systemd team. "Everything" seems like it is getting replaced by stuff made by systemd team as if they had patented wisdom or what. Including other perfectly functioning software. I suddenly have to use systemd-* over them. Like, hell, what is systemd-boot and when and why it replaced grub2? I don't call this evolution. This is bad form of centralization and seizing power.
  - IgorPartola 6y ago
    You know I feel that way about the Linux kernel. Everything is done by the Linux kernel developers and it’s shipped as one monolithic thing. Wouldn’t it be better to get drivers for networks cards from other places? Or have to pick from a list of memory management packages that get downloaded from GitHub on every reboot? And why do they include things like spin lock implementations? Should that be an NPM package? /s
    - badsectoracula 6y ago
      You're joking but having drivers separate from the rest of the Linux kernel and with a stable ABI would certainly help other OSes as well (e.g. ReactOS, Haiku).
  - viraptor 6y ago
    > I suddenly have to use systemd-* over them. You really don't. You have the choice to go with a distro which doesn't use them, or to mix&match yourself.
  - candiddevmike 6y ago
    I personally prefer systemd-boot over grub2, it's dead simple to configure and works really well for UEFI systems (and dual booting windows).
  - zbentley 6y ago
    > Like, hell, what is systemd-boot and when and why it replaced grub2? I've been really happy with systemd-boot; in my limited (used it on probably a dozen machines across several distros at this point) experience, it's better at autodetecting nonstandard images/locations than grub, and is vastly friendlier to weird partitioning schemes. It also has a much more minimal config surface than grub, which I like (since, across distros, I no longer have to learn a distro-specific set of nested/included grub config files and conventions, nor do I have to worry about what will be auto-regenerated when a distro does a kernel update versus what configs I need to edit by hand). However, that limited config surface may be a drawback to people who need to customize very esoteric boot cases. I also aesthetically prefer systemd-boot's minimalism and focus on newer (UEFI) boot strategies compared to grub; the latter is huge in terms of functionality. A lot of that size is needed for rare cases and older boot configurations (and if you fall into either group, grub is what you should use), but it complicates the "happy path" on post-2010 computers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gummiboot_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gummiboot_(software)
znpy 6y ago
> but WHY it has to be in systemd? «It (systemd) provides a system and service manager» (from https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/). So it manages services and manages the system, as a whole. > Every time I see all the stuff packed into it I feel extreme urge to switch to freebsd again. Meh, a lot of people bring this up, but they never switch.
tannhaeuser 6y ago
> LennartOS Lennax
MetaDark 6y ago
FreeBSD includes a kernel, drivers, and userland utilities under one project. If your complaint is that systemd is "bloated", it doesn't make any sense why you would want to switch to a system that's even more "bloated".
pengaru 6y ago
systemd-oomd wasn't even developed by Lennart, Anita Zhang of Facebook contributed it. Try understanding a bit more than just the name's prefix before getting so bent out of shape.
mnd999 6y ago
You should switch to FreeBSD, because imho it’s great. However, you should probably switch to FreeBSD because you think it’s great too, not because you hate systemd.
esarbe 6y ago
Yes, please. Switch to FreeBSD. Every FreeBSD developer knows what a terrible idea SystemD is. https://papers.freebsd.org/2018/bsdcan/rice-the_tragedy_of_systemd/ https://papers.freebsd.org/2018/bsdcan/rice-the_tragedy_of_s... Joke's on you.

by hexo 6y ago

Gaelan 6y ago

You're concerned about a project gaining too many features, so you… move to FreeBSD, an OS where everything is developed as one project?

edoceo 6y ago

Come to Gentoo! I've been booting with OpenRC since forever have have completely ignored the systemd drama. The only thing eating my userspace is me.

disposekinetics 6y ago
I can second this, recent Gentoo has been a pleasure to work with.
- mrlonglong 6y ago
  You can use Gnome 3 without systemd. Biggest plus point about Gentoo. Love it to bits even if it gives me headaches sometimes !

cmeacham98 6y ago

This is a common mistake. systemd-oomd is not "in" systemd the init system. Similar to systemd-resolved, systemd-networkd, systemd-boot, and others it just has the systemd name because it is developed by the systemd team. A minimal system using sytemd for the init system and other software for everything else only needs sytemd, dbus, and journald. I use several of these projects because I like the systemd design philosophy (ex the way the CLI interface and config files are) and trust the developers of their software. However, there are popular altenatives available for all of these components, should you choose to use them: systemd-resolved: bind9, dnsmasq, powerdns systemd-networkd: NetworkManager, ConnMan systemd-boot: GRUB2, Refind, EFISTUB systemd-oomd: earlyoom, nohang, oomd (the facebook one, not systemd)

hexo 6y ago
This is exactly my problem. It is made by systemd team. "Everything" seems like it is getting replaced by stuff made by systemd team as if they had patented wisdom or what. Including other perfectly functioning software. I suddenly have to use systemd-* over them. Like, hell, what is systemd-boot and when and why it replaced grub2? I don't call this evolution. This is bad form of centralization and seizing power.
- IgorPartola 6y ago
  You know I feel that way about the Linux kernel. Everything is done by the Linux kernel developers and it’s shipped as one monolithic thing. Wouldn’t it be better to get drivers for networks cards from other places? Or have to pick from a list of memory management packages that get downloaded from GitHub on every reboot? And why do they include things like spin lock implementations? Should that be an NPM package? /s
  - badsectoracula 6y ago
    You're joking but having drivers separate from the rest of the Linux kernel and with a stable ABI would certainly help other OSes as well (e.g. ReactOS, Haiku).
- viraptor 6y ago
  > I suddenly have to use systemd-* over them. You really don't. You have the choice to go with a distro which doesn't use them, or to mix&match yourself.
- candiddevmike 6y ago
  I personally prefer systemd-boot over grub2, it's dead simple to configure and works really well for UEFI systems (and dual booting windows).
- zbentley 6y ago
  > Like, hell, what is systemd-boot and when and why it replaced grub2? I've been really happy with systemd-boot; in my limited (used it on probably a dozen machines across several distros at this point) experience, it's better at autodetecting nonstandard images/locations than grub, and is vastly friendlier to weird partitioning schemes. It also has a much more minimal config surface than grub, which I like (since, across distros, I no longer have to learn a distro-specific set of nested/included grub config files and conventions, nor do I have to worry about what will be auto-regenerated when a distro does a kernel update versus what configs I need to edit by hand). However, that limited config surface may be a drawback to people who need to customize very esoteric boot cases. I also aesthetically prefer systemd-boot's minimalism and focus on newer (UEFI) boot strategies compared to grub; the latter is huge in terms of functionality. A lot of that size is needed for rare cases and older boot configurations (and if you fall into either group, grub is what you should use), but it complicates the "happy path" on post-2010 computers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gummiboot_(software) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gummiboot_(software)

znpy 6y ago

> but WHY it has to be in systemd? «It (systemd) provides a system and service manager» (from https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/ https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/). So it manages services and manages the system, as a whole. > Every time I see all the stuff packed into it I feel extreme urge to switch to freebsd again. Meh, a lot of people bring this up, but they never switch.

tannhaeuser 6y ago

> LennartOS Lennax

MetaDark 6y ago

FreeBSD includes a kernel, drivers, and userland utilities under one project. If your complaint is that systemd is "bloated", it doesn't make any sense why you would want to switch to a system that's even more "bloated".

pengaru 6y ago

systemd-oomd wasn't even developed by Lennart, Anita Zhang of Facebook contributed it. Try understanding a bit more than just the name's prefix before getting so bent out of shape.

mnd999 6y ago

You should switch to FreeBSD, because imho it’s great. However, you should probably switch to FreeBSD because you think it’s great too, not because you hate systemd.

esarbe 6y ago

Yes, please. Switch to FreeBSD. Every FreeBSD developer knows what a terrible idea SystemD is. https://papers.freebsd.org/2018/bsdcan/rice-the_tragedy_of_systemd/ https://papers.freebsd.org/2018/bsdcan/rice-the_tragedy_of_s... Joke's on you.