5 ms·

Are we REALLY still complaining about systemd? Systemd has been one of the best things to happen to Linux.

Karunamon 4y ago
Considering that systemd-oomd as shipped by Ubuntu is happy to start gunning processes when there are upwards of 10 GB of free memory on the system, I think those complaints are entirely justified. This is hardly the only instance of some systemd appendage presumptuously doing something obnoxious or destructive.
JPLeRouzic 4y ago
I am not someone who knows arcane system programming, but I use Linux since 20 years on commercial laptops, from Asus, DELL and Lenovo, etc. IMO the Linux of the 2000' where much better than today's Linux. The Linux I use are always Debian based, like Ubuntu. For example Linux used to have a sleep mode which worked perfectly. Now it does not sleep reliably. For example if I move the mouse while it sleeps, it wakes up, even with the screen closed and uses the battery until there is no more energy in them. So the computer is unusable when I need it. Another example is copy/paste. Today it works sometimes, some other times it paste another previous content. I use now Ubuntu 20.0.4 LTS. I just copied/pasted the version number from the system monitor panel to write this post, it pasted a previous content I copied in my browser! A third example when I use a right click on Ubuntu's Chromium (a snap browser) then I have garbage on the screen. This browser can't display correctly non western characters. So I do not know if its because systemd but a few years ago I used Trisquel Linux which did not used systemd at the time, and everything worked perfectly as I remember in the 2000'.
- cheeselip420 4y ago
  This sounds more like issues with snap (and its isolation model) than systemd. Power issues are always a pain. I built out the Linux OS for a fleet of mobile robots and found that the defaults for power management were very poor, but everything is there to get a bulletproof system. I could see how there would be issues with more unique laptop setups or external monitors/keyboards and whatnot.
- thawaya3113 4y ago
  This could also just be Ubuntu. So many distros are based on Ubuntu and it’s pretty clear that Canonical doesn’t really care about Ubuntu on the desktop. It’s little more than a sales funnel for them to make sure people use Ubuntu servers as well, at this point.
  - GauntletWizard 4y ago
    What is the best modern desktop distro? I am running Ubuntu on my newly-built "Gaming" linux box, and I am impressed with how far gaming on linux has come, but I am unimpressed with Ubuntu and Gnome Desktop.
    - shrimp_emoji 4y ago
      I think Manjaro. Arch is amazing; the newest software often works the best; the rolling model gives you new hardware support the fastest; the AUR has all the software ever (from Minecraft to the OldSchool RuneScape launcher to SVP for video interpolation); the Arch wiki is the most detailed resource ever. But installing Arch is hard, and rarely there might be manual intervention. Enter Manjaro, which is easy to install, holds back packages for a very little while to preclude users dealing with any manual intervention breakage, has super-friendly forums (unlike Arch ;p), has an easy GUI for switching kernels and drivers, and yet has the AUR and can benefit from Arch wiki since it's Arch-based. In my experience, both Arch and Manjaro have worked way better than Ubuntu (in terms of freezes and crashes), which seemed deeply paradoxical. >I am unimpressed with Ubuntu and Gnome Desktop. GNOME 3 is a laptop/tablet DE. It barely supports multiple monitors, unlike KDE, which is foremost a *desktop* DE. Amazing panel (aka taskbar), multimonitoring is a first-class concern (you can game on one monitor while you have a panel with tray that can have your CPU/GPU temps and the time on the other), deeply customizable, and my favorite bit is that you can disable desktop composition in its settings. Why? Because that makes it buttery smooth, which extends to games. Try dragging a window around with your mouse on a >=120 Hz monitor with composition on and then off to see what I'm talking about. (And all you lose by turning it off is terminal transparency.) In GNOME, of course, doing this is impossible (or at least extremely esoteric; it's not a setting). GNOME and KDE are the two most polished DEs out there, but only one of them is a desktop DE. :p

Considering that systemd-oomd as shipped by Ubuntu is happy to start gunning processes when there are upwards of 10 GB of free memory on the system, I think those complaints are entirely justified. This is hardly the only instance of some systemd appendage presumptuously doing something obnoxious or destructive.

JPLeRouzic 4y ago

I am not someone who knows arcane system programming, but I use Linux since 20 years on commercial laptops, from Asus, DELL and Lenovo, etc. IMO the Linux of the 2000' where much better than today's Linux. The Linux I use are always Debian based, like Ubuntu. For example Linux used to have a sleep mode which worked perfectly. Now it does not sleep reliably. For example if I move the mouse while it sleeps, it wakes up, even with the screen closed and uses the battery until there is no more energy in them. So the computer is unusable when I need it. Another example is copy/paste. Today it works sometimes, some other times it paste another previous content. I use now Ubuntu 20.0.4 LTS. I just copied/pasted the version number from the system monitor panel to write this post, it pasted a previous content I copied in my browser! A third example when I use a right click on Ubuntu's Chromium (a snap browser) then I have garbage on the screen. This browser can't display correctly non western characters. So I do not know if its because systemd but a few years ago I used Trisquel Linux which did not used systemd at the time, and everything worked perfectly as I remember in the 2000'.

cheeselip420 4y ago
This sounds more like issues with snap (and its isolation model) than systemd. Power issues are always a pain. I built out the Linux OS for a fleet of mobile robots and found that the defaults for power management were very poor, but everything is there to get a bulletproof system. I could see how there would be issues with more unique laptop setups or external monitors/keyboards and whatnot.
thawaya3113 4y ago
This could also just be Ubuntu. So many distros are based on Ubuntu and it’s pretty clear that Canonical doesn’t really care about Ubuntu on the desktop. It’s little more than a sales funnel for them to make sure people use Ubuntu servers as well, at this point.
- GauntletWizard 4y ago
  What is the best modern desktop distro? I am running Ubuntu on my newly-built "Gaming" linux box, and I am impressed with how far gaming on linux has come, but I am unimpressed with Ubuntu and Gnome Desktop.
  - shrimp_emoji 4y ago
    I think Manjaro. Arch is amazing; the newest software often works the best; the rolling model gives you new hardware support the fastest; the AUR has all the software ever (from Minecraft to the OldSchool RuneScape launcher to SVP for video interpolation); the Arch wiki is the most detailed resource ever. But installing Arch is hard, and rarely there might be manual intervention. Enter Manjaro, which is easy to install, holds back packages for a very little while to preclude users dealing with any manual intervention breakage, has super-friendly forums (unlike Arch ;p), has an easy GUI for switching kernels and drivers, and yet has the AUR and can benefit from Arch wiki since it's Arch-based. In my experience, both Arch and Manjaro have worked way better than Ubuntu (in terms of freezes and crashes), which seemed deeply paradoxical. >I am unimpressed with Ubuntu and Gnome Desktop. GNOME 3 is a laptop/tablet DE. It barely supports multiple monitors, unlike KDE, which is foremost a *desktop* DE. Amazing panel (aka taskbar), multimonitoring is a first-class concern (you can game on one monitor while you have a panel with tray that can have your CPU/GPU temps and the time on the other), deeply customizable, and my favorite bit is that you can disable desktop composition in its settings. Why? Because that makes it buttery smooth, which extends to games. Try dragging a window around with your mouse on a >=120 Hz monitor with composition on and then off to see what I'm talking about. (And all you lose by turning it off is terminal transparency.) In GNOME, of course, doing this is impossible (or at least extremely esoteric; it's not a setting). GNOME and KDE are the two most polished DEs out there, but only one of them is a desktop DE. :p