5 ms·

Version 5 of systemd-free Debian remix Devuan is here

28 points by lproven 3y ago

sylware 3y ago
Some debian zealots do not understand: they say debian has the sysvinit alternatives which are available. It is some lack of perspective or it is hypocritical since they perfectly know how important being the "default" is. Devuan is no-systemd by default, and yes, it does matter a lot, namely the software stack has been tested/debugged to be consistent and working without systemd.
- tetris11 3y ago
  The banned packages list is surprisingly not that long, and a good chunk of the packages listed there are systemd helper utilities: https://pkgmaster.devuan.org/bannedpackages.txt https://pkgmaster.devuan.org/bannedpackages.txt
  - sylware 3y ago
    A lot of work was put in in order to achieve such "small list". We are talking about half a decade of work and breaking thru some blockades...
klysm 3y ago
For those looking to understand some of the history of the anti-systemd feelings, I found this presentation useful: The Tragedy of systemd (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo)
- glassfish 3y ago
  Another one - https://www.theregister.com/2014/04/05/torvalds_sievers_dust_up/ https://www.theregister.com/2014/04/05/torvalds_sievers_dust...
  - andrewstuart 3y ago
    So the objection here is what….. bugs? Is the implication that systemd has bugs and nothing else does? If so that’s nonsensical.
- SirMaster 3y ago
  I have to wonder, if an in-depth explanation is needed to say why it's bad, then is it really that bad? I have been using Debian for a long time, and I moved to systemd when they switched and I have not had any issues with it that I can think of.
  - hnfong 3y ago
    The presentation doesn't really say it's bad. The presenter just gives a context of why it has stirred up so much controversy, and how it has the potential to improve the way things are done on Linux.
  - klysm 3y ago
    The presentation is more of a defense of systemd
alextingle 3y ago
I wish we could have a systemd that JUST does the job of init, and leaves the system logging, DNS resolving, etc. to the prexisting software that does a better job of it.
- eklitzke 3y ago
  You literally don't need to use those features to use systemd. There's no requirement on journald or systemd-resolved if you just want to use systemd as an init. Distros are typically configured to use these features because they bring a bunch of benefits and are simpler to configure, but they're completely optional. At my job we manage an embedded Linux distro (using Yocto) and while we've been using systemd as init for a while, we only enabled journald relatively recently, and don't use the other stuff.
  - rnhmjoj 3y ago
    > There's no requirement on journald Are you sure? I don't think it's possible to disable the journal for the whole system.
  - pengaru 3y ago
    > You literally don't need to use those features to use systemd. There's no requirement on journald or systemd-resolved if you just want to use systemd as an init. Unit/Service file syntax controls per-service logging, PID1 is rather tightly coupled to journald in implementing those features. Hence the service manager explicitly checks that journald is running at startup: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v254/src/core/manager.c#L1884 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v254/src/core/manage... Other components like resolved and networkd are optional however.
    - gizmo686 3y ago
      Does that actually require journald to be running though. Following that code through to the actual check gets to the comment: > The journal is fully and entirely up? If so, let's permit logging to it, if that's configured. If the journal is down, don't ever log to it, otherwise we might end up deadlocking ourselves as we might trigger an activation ourselves we can't fulfill. I have never run in such a configuration, but based on this code, it sounds like there is explicit support for running without journald.
dcahill-ieee 3y ago
I develop and maintain a plurality of custom linux distros for embedded hardware using Yocto. I used to be the InitV guy, the first half of my distros use it and it's horrible. Every change breaks something. Services start and don't stop or vice versa. I recently switched to using Systemd and life is so much better. You can actually reason about systemd's operation and load order. The systems I build linux for have 128MB of ram up to 1GB of ram, are mostly 32 bit and use SD-Card like storage. In other words not exactly super performant and systemd boots in the same time as InitV. At worst it's 2-3 seconds slower. If I can't tell the difference on a $20 microprocessor I guarantee you can't either on the current state of the art CPU's. For reference my latest systemd based distro is 32 bits, runs at 400MHz and possesses a proud 200bogoMips of grunt.
- davrosthedalek 3y ago
  I don't think people complain about systemd being slow. It's supposed to be faster than initV because of parallel/delayed startup. But initV is the wrong comparison point anyway. Runit, upstart, openRC are all much better than initV. I certainly had less problems with openRC on my gentoo box than with systemD on my ubuntu box -- mainly because of all the add-ons (ntp, dns etc.) beyond init itself.
peter_d_sherman 3y ago
Distrowatch's Advanced Search page: (note the "Init software" section of checkbox choices, near the end...) https://distrowatch.com/search.php#advanced https://distrowatch.com/search.php#advanced
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

28 points by lproven 3y ago

Some debian zealots do not understand: they say debian has the sysvinit alternatives which are available. It is some lack of perspective or it is hypocritical since they perfectly know how important being the "default" is. Devuan is no-systemd by default, and yes, it does matter a lot, namely the software stack has been tested/debugged to be consistent and working without systemd.

tetris11 3y ago
The banned packages list is surprisingly not that long, and a good chunk of the packages listed there are systemd helper utilities: https://pkgmaster.devuan.org/bannedpackages.txt https://pkgmaster.devuan.org/bannedpackages.txt
- sylware 3y ago
  A lot of work was put in in order to achieve such "small list". We are talking about half a decade of work and breaking thru some blockades...

klysm 3y ago

For those looking to understand some of the history of the anti-systemd feelings, I found this presentation useful: The Tragedy of systemd (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo)

glassfish 3y ago
Another one - https://www.theregister.com/2014/04/05/torvalds_sievers_dust_up/ https://www.theregister.com/2014/04/05/torvalds_sievers_dust...
- andrewstuart 3y ago
  So the objection here is what….. bugs? Is the implication that systemd has bugs and nothing else does? If so that’s nonsensical.
SirMaster 3y ago
I have to wonder, if an in-depth explanation is needed to say why it's bad, then is it really that bad? I have been using Debian for a long time, and I moved to systemd when they switched and I have not had any issues with it that I can think of.
- hnfong 3y ago
  The presentation doesn't really say it's bad. The presenter just gives a context of why it has stirred up so much controversy, and how it has the potential to improve the way things are done on Linux.
- klysm 3y ago
  The presentation is more of a defense of systemd

alextingle 3y ago

I wish we could have a systemd that JUST does the job of init, and leaves the system logging, DNS resolving, etc. to the prexisting software that does a better job of it.

eklitzke 3y ago
You literally don't need to use those features to use systemd. There's no requirement on journald or systemd-resolved if you just want to use systemd as an init. Distros are typically configured to use these features because they bring a bunch of benefits and are simpler to configure, but they're completely optional. At my job we manage an embedded Linux distro (using Yocto) and while we've been using systemd as init for a while, we only enabled journald relatively recently, and don't use the other stuff.
- rnhmjoj 3y ago
  > There's no requirement on journald Are you sure? I don't think it's possible to disable the journal for the whole system.
- pengaru 3y ago
  > You literally don't need to use those features to use systemd. There's no requirement on journald or systemd-resolved if you just want to use systemd as an init. Unit/Service file syntax controls per-service logging, PID1 is rather tightly coupled to journald in implementing those features. Hence the service manager explicitly checks that journald is running at startup: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v254/src/core/manager.c#L1884 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/v254/src/core/manage... Other components like resolved and networkd are optional however.
  - gizmo686 3y ago
    Does that actually require journald to be running though. Following that code through to the actual check gets to the comment: > The journal is fully and entirely up? If so, let's permit logging to it, if that's configured. If the journal is down, don't ever log to it, otherwise we might end up deadlocking ourselves as we might trigger an activation ourselves we can't fulfill. I have never run in such a configuration, but based on this code, it sounds like there is explicit support for running without journald.

dcahill-ieee 3y ago

I develop and maintain a plurality of custom linux distros for embedded hardware using Yocto. I used to be the InitV guy, the first half of my distros use it and it's horrible. Every change breaks something. Services start and don't stop or vice versa. I recently switched to using Systemd and life is so much better. You can actually reason about systemd's operation and load order. The systems I build linux for have 128MB of ram up to 1GB of ram, are mostly 32 bit and use SD-Card like storage. In other words not exactly super performant and systemd boots in the same time as InitV. At worst it's 2-3 seconds slower. If I can't tell the difference on a $20 microprocessor I guarantee you can't either on the current state of the art CPU's. For reference my latest systemd based distro is 32 bits, runs at 400MHz and possesses a proud 200bogoMips of grunt.

davrosthedalek 3y ago
I don't think people complain about systemd being slow. It's supposed to be faster than initV because of parallel/delayed startup. But initV is the wrong comparison point anyway. Runit, upstart, openRC are all much better than initV. I certainly had less problems with openRC on my gentoo box than with systemD on my ubuntu box -- mainly because of all the add-ons (ntp, dns etc.) beyond init itself.

peter_d_sherman 3y ago

Distrowatch's Advanced Search page: (note the "Init software" section of checkbox choices, near the end...) https://distrowatch.com/search.php#advanced https://distrowatch.com/search.php#advanced

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]