4 ms·

After many years of systemd, I truly believe it has made Linux significantly better. Its strangler pattern is real, but the landscape is so much greener as a r

After many years of systemd, I truly believe it has made Linux significantly better. Its strangler pattern is real, but the landscape is so much greener as a result. Very happy to see support for it on WSL2.

baybal2 5y ago
> After many years of systemd, I truly believe it has made Linux significantly better. After many years of systemd, I truly believe it has made Linux significantly worse. Thought it managed to standardise the linux ecosystem on one behaviour: nothing works by default 1.5k bugs, with a dozen showstopper blockers at any time
- md8z 5y ago
  I can't say that's been my experience, are you by chance using a rolling release distribution?
  - tata71 5y ago
    You mean the only distros with reasonably aggressive security patch intervals?
    - md8z 5y ago
      Which LTS distros were you looking at that did not receive security backports?
      - tata71 5y ago
        Yes, but how late, comparatively speaking?
    - Snetry 5y ago
      No, the ones with such a habit of breaking things that xorg.conf being messed up became a joke
      - tata71 5y ago
        Fair play. Although, during that era, the same issues were hella common on Ubuntu systems etc as well.
  - svennek 5y ago
    I am running quite some stuff for multiple customers on systemd on arch. And I must say that generally the ride has been smooth and pleasant, and we have been doing that for years. I for one is not looking back at the sysv script spaghetti with fondness...
- vegai_ 5y ago
  >Thought it managed to standardise the linux ecosystem on one behaviour: nothing works by default Except that in reality, everything works, all the time, and most of the reason that it does is due to all the hard work and good design put into systemd. > 1.5k bugs, with a dozen showstopper blockers at any time If you look at successful open source projects, you will see that all of them have thousands of bug reports open, and most of them will never be even touched by a developer. You simply can not imply anything about the quality of an open source software project by that metric, only that it's a successful. I've been using Linux since 1996, and compared to the mess that was before systemd, I'm very happy about it. My remaining hopes are that wayland would finally kick xorg to the ditch where it should've been 10 years ago and that pipewire (or whatever) sorts out the audio problems (like they should've been sorted out 20 years ago).
  - baybal2 5y ago
    I'm on linux since y2k, and I attest. "Nothing works by default" is the default system behaviour of systemd distros on anything, but the most standard x86 system. I worked with laptop makers, and systemd manages to brick the system in ways not even imaginable on regular init. No HDA codec, and pulseaudio hangs DBUS? Brick. Systemd's agetty analog not seeing serial port? Brick... > xorg to the ditch where it should've been 10 years ago and that pipewire (or whatever) sorts out the audio problems (like they should've been sorted out 20 years ago). I would argue that Pipewire can make a decent display server, way better than what Wayland currently offers for just the way it manages IPC. > If you look at successful open source projects, you will see that all of them have thousands of bug reports open, and most of them will never be even touched by a developer. You simply can not imply anything about the quality of an open source software project by that metric, only that it's a successful. Proper open source projects fix their bugs bugs. GNOME had millions of users at the peak, and it's core projects seen under 100 bugs. And that's for a major C codebase. SystemD on other hand, manages to go through several major releases with unfixed memleaks. I can only have unflattering words about its quality, and project maintenance practices. I have simply no other words: It's garbage, utter garbage.
    - viraptor 5y ago

baybal2 5y ago

> After many years of systemd, I truly believe it has made Linux significantly better. After many years of systemd, I truly believe it has made Linux significantly worse. Thought it managed to standardise the linux ecosystem on one behaviour: nothing works by default 1.5k bugs, with a dozen showstopper blockers at any time

md8z 5y ago
I can't say that's been my experience, are you by chance using a rolling release distribution?
- tata71 5y ago
  You mean the only distros with reasonably aggressive security patch intervals?
  - md8z 5y ago
    Which LTS distros were you looking at that did not receive security backports?
    - tata71 5y ago
      Yes, but how late, comparatively speaking?
  - Snetry 5y ago
    No, the ones with such a habit of breaking things that xorg.conf being messed up became a joke
    - tata71 5y ago
      Fair play. Although, during that era, the same issues were hella common on Ubuntu systems etc as well.
- svennek 5y ago
  I am running quite some stuff for multiple customers on systemd on arch. And I must say that generally the ride has been smooth and pleasant, and we have been doing that for years. I for one is not looking back at the sysv script spaghetti with fondness...
vegai_ 5y ago
>Thought it managed to standardise the linux ecosystem on one behaviour: nothing works by default Except that in reality, everything works, all the time, and most of the reason that it does is due to all the hard work and good design put into systemd. > 1.5k bugs, with a dozen showstopper blockers at any time If you look at successful open source projects, you will see that all of them have thousands of bug reports open, and most of them will never be even touched by a developer. You simply can not imply anything about the quality of an open source software project by that metric, only that it's a successful. I've been using Linux since 1996, and compared to the mess that was before systemd, I'm very happy about it. My remaining hopes are that wayland would finally kick xorg to the ditch where it should've been 10 years ago and that pipewire (or whatever) sorts out the audio problems (like they should've been sorted out 20 years ago).
- baybal2 5y ago
  I'm on linux since y2k, and I attest. "Nothing works by default" is the default system behaviour of systemd distros on anything, but the most standard x86 system. I worked with laptop makers, and systemd manages to brick the system in ways not even imaginable on regular init. No HDA codec, and pulseaudio hangs DBUS? Brick. Systemd's agetty analog not seeing serial port? Brick... > xorg to the ditch where it should've been 10 years ago and that pipewire (or whatever) sorts out the audio problems (like they should've been sorted out 20 years ago). I would argue that Pipewire can make a decent display server, way better than what Wayland currently offers for just the way it manages IPC. > If you look at successful open source projects, you will see that all of them have thousands of bug reports open, and most of them will never be even touched by a developer. You simply can not imply anything about the quality of an open source software project by that metric, only that it's a successful. Proper open source projects fix their bugs bugs. GNOME had millions of users at the peak, and it's core projects seen under 100 bugs. And that's for a major C codebase. SystemD on other hand, manages to go through several major releases with unfixed memleaks. I can only have unflattering words about its quality, and project maintenance practices. I have simply no other words: It's garbage, utter garbage.
  - viraptor 5y ago