3 ms·
Summary of the points: and what they mean. 1. Systemd's Complexity and Scope: The increased complexity allows for better integration and coordination of system
by lynguist 3y ago
Summary of the points: and what they mean.
1. Systemd's Complexity and Scope: The increased complexity allows for better integration and coordination of system components.
2. Journal Files in Binary Format: The binary format improves performance and allows for richer metadata storage.
3. Systemd's Team Being Anti-Unix: The tight integration with the Linux kernel API optimizes the use of Linux-specific features.
4. Forced Dependencies on udev and dbus: The integration of udev and systemd provides more streamlined and coordinated system management.
5. Saving Core Dumps to the Journal: Storing core dumps in the journal makes it easier to correlate system logs with crashes.
6. Systemd as a Single Point of Failure: Proper maintenance and security practices can mitigate the risks associated with any critical software component.
7. Systemd's Viral Nature: The adoption of systemd by major projects like GNOME can be seen as the natural evolution of the ecosystem around a dominant technology.
8. Systemd Clustering into PID 1: The role of systemd as PID 1 represents a trade-off between integration and risk.
9. Designing Systemd with glibc in Mind: The tight coupling with glibc is a pragmatic choice to optimize for the most commonly used C library in the Linux ecosystem.
10. Systemd's Complexity Hinders Extensibility: More features and integrated behavior in systemd naturally lead to increased complexity.
11. Systemd's Symbolic Shift in Linux Community: The shift towards a more integrated and monolithic approach represents a change in the Linux community's direction.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- gettodachoppa 3y agoI'm not a systemd hater by any means, but I think you're presenting some of these in bad faith. > Systemd as a Single Point of Failure: Proper maintenance and security practices can mitigate the risks associated with any critical software component. "Proper" meaning very expensive and very complex that only a limited number of sysadmins can do? Likely involving expensive virtualization and/or redundnacy technologies? Going down a never-ending rabbit hole that pays a lot of consultants or corporations trapping you with vendor lock-in? > Systemd's Viral Nature: The adoption of systemd by major projects like GNOME can be seen as the natural evolution of the ecosystem around a dominant technology. This is naive take. It should be seen as what it is: systemd and Gnome are both Red Hat products (no matter what anyone says, Gnome is Red Hat's desktop), and RH leaders mandating that Gnome depend on systemd in order to ram through systemd's adoption in the same way Microsoft did IE. There's also a small chance it was a typical Lennart Poettering "fuck you, what are you gonna do about it?" act of pure contempt for what anyone else thinks. That guy has got to be the most hated German since Adolf.
- Tommstein 3y ago> There's also a small chance it was a typical Lennart Poettering "fuck you, what are you gonna do about it?" act of pure contempt for what anyone else thinks. That guy has got to be the most hated German since Adolf. I laughed, but Adolf was Austrian.