7 ms·

Systemd being one big monolithic system locks you in to, frankly, just a lot of shitty decisions. Take for example the fact that it decides to bind to port 53 o

by mike_d 2y ago

Systemd being one big monolithic system locks you in to, frankly, just a lot of shitty decisions. Take for example the fact that it decides to bind to port 53 on localhost, for absolutely no good reason. Now if your response is that is not a big deal, or you push your glasses up on your nose and want to explain why its important, imagine for a second if it was port 80 or 443.

jdenning 2y ago
Exactly - this is a perfect example of what has always bothered me about systemd.
- rerdavies 2y ago
  Binding a DNS server to 127.0.01:53 is a perfect example of what has always bothered you about systemd? Seriously not getting it. Providing DNS services on 127.0.0.1:53 has nothing to do with systemd. It's a convention used by NetworkManager, and associated network services. The very good reason being that network interfaces that are being brought up and down can choose to forward their DNS requests to 127.0.0.1, and allow a completely separate unit (resolved?) to deal with the details of where DNS requests get forwarded from there. (Or not, if they so choose). Was there some OTHER burning compelling use-case that makes you want to use 127.0.0.1:53 for some other purpose?
  - the_real_cher 2y ago
    From the man pages: "Additionally, systemd-resolved provides a local DNS stub listener on the IP addresses 127.0.0.53 and 127.0.0.54 on the local loopback interface" https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.service.8.html https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.s... > Was there some OTHER burning compelling use-case that makes you want to use 127.0.0.1:53 for some other purpose? The problem is... by default... resolvd routes ALL DNS REQUESTS to this stub by over writing resolv.conf with ONLY that socket and forcing you to configure resolvers elsewhere. And you have to manually reconfigure this if you want to change it and it forces you to get in the weeds way to much when all you want to do is add a DNS resolver. https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.service.8.html#/ETC/RESOLV.CONF https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.s... The confusing thing is why the heck is SYSTEMD an init system writing DNS resolvers? Seems out of it's scope in my opinion. I was surprised resolvd existed when I was trying to troubleshoot a DNS error caused by it.
    - johnny22 2y ago
      resolved is neither started by default on systemd nor required in any way. Your distro chose that.
      - the_real_cher 2y ago
        As most mainstream distros will just to fall in line with the standard. unless you want to use Arch at some point it will be the default for most Linux.
        johnny22 2y ago
        there is no standard. it's just a tool that ships with systemd that some folks use and some don't.
        the_real_cher 2y ago
        yeah just like systemd right?
        rerdavies 2y ago
        Isn't mainstream distros all doing the same thing a Very Good Thing Indeed?
jauntywundrkind 2y ago
Systemd doesn't. The systemd monorepo also provides systemd-resolvd which does, but this is optional and last I checked not included or at least started by default on Debian, for example.
- the_real_cher 2y ago
  Systemd-resolvd is started by default on my Ubuntu distro v24.
  - jauntywundrkind 2y ago
    Good choice! It's great! If you really don't want it, it's super easy to disable: systemctl disable systemd-resolved
    - egorfine 2y ago
      If only it was that easy. Unfortunately, systemd-resolved is a sticky piece. You have to `apt-get uninstall` it, then `rm /etc/resolv.conf` and replace it with a sane file (`nameserver 1.1.1.1` or whatever). For previous versions I had to `chattr +x` as well because systemd stuff of course will not let me have my resolver.
      - vetinari 2y ago
        No, disabling, or at works masking is enough. `nameserver 1.1.1.1` is insane. Hope you don't ever have to use link-specific resolver.
        the_real_cher 2y ago
        Link specific resolvers ONLY are insane. Why am I forced into nothing but link specific resolvers? Why cant I have a global default resolver anymore, with link specific as needed?
        2y ago
wongogue 2y ago
Stub resolver for systemd-resolved? Maybe check with what your distribution is shipping.
- egorfine 2y ago
  I believe systemd-resolved being the absolute worst part of the whole systemd ecosystem and especially the way it's packaged into Ubuntu.
favorited 2y ago
You're right – if I imagine systemd doing something else than what it does, I don't like it!
bigfatkitten 2y ago
I have no real complaints about systemd as an init system. I have plenty to say about systemd not staying in its lane. systemd's developers have formed a habit of deciding to implement something like an NTP client or DNS resolver, bringing a healthy dose of ignorance of how those services actually work, and then doubling down on their poor design decisions when problems are brought to their attention.
- tapoxi 2y ago
  But that's systemd the project, not systemd the init system. You don't need to use any of those components to use systemd, which has no dependencies on them. Those services can live and die on their own merits.
  - bigfatkitten 2y ago
    They can ship as much trash as they like, so long as it doesn't become my problem. Those components become my problem when the distributions I choose to use choose to adopt them, and then I have to work around them.
    - tuna74 2y ago
      Choose something else then. If there is one thing the world is not lacking it is Linux distros.
      - bigfatkitten 2y ago
        As a hobbyist, sure. It's not quite that simple when I have commercial apps I need to run in a regulated environment.
        growse 2y ago
        There's nothing about regulated environments or commercial apps that limit your choice to "systemd on Linux". Everything is a tradeoff.
the_real_cher 2y ago
resolvd was running by default on Ubuntu 24. I was struggling with it while trying to troubleshoot a VPN connection because resolvd automates resolve.conf into a generated file from several other files and will overwrite any other functionality trying to add resolvers to resolve.conf, like an internal VPN company resolver for example. Why is systemd even touching DNS? Seems a little outside of it's scope. This is kinda crazy to me personally when I found out resolvd was doing this. https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.service.8.html#/ETC/RESOLV.CONF https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.s...
- tuna74 2y ago
  "Why is systemd even touching DNS?" resolvd != systemd. It seems like you are mad that Ubuntu changed DNS resolver, but isn't that the actual job of a Linux distro?
  - the_real_cher 2y ago
    the full name of the service is systemd-resolvd...
    - vetinari 2y ago
      yes, and full name of coreutils is GNU coreutils.
      - the_real_cher 2y ago
        systemd-resolvd is in the literal systemd code base. https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/main/src%2Fresolve https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/main/src%2Fresolve
        vetinari 2y ago
        So are udev and nss modules. It's monorepo.

by mike_d 2y ago

jdenning 2y ago

Exactly - this is a perfect example of what has always bothered me about systemd.

rerdavies 2y ago
Binding a DNS server to 127.0.01:53 is a perfect example of what has always bothered you about systemd? Seriously not getting it. Providing DNS services on 127.0.0.1:53 has nothing to do with systemd. It's a convention used by NetworkManager, and associated network services. The very good reason being that network interfaces that are being brought up and down can choose to forward their DNS requests to 127.0.0.1, and allow a completely separate unit (resolved?) to deal with the details of where DNS requests get forwarded from there. (Or not, if they so choose). Was there some OTHER burning compelling use-case that makes you want to use 127.0.0.1:53 for some other purpose?
- the_real_cher 2y ago
  From the man pages: "Additionally, systemd-resolved provides a local DNS stub listener on the IP addresses 127.0.0.53 and 127.0.0.54 on the local loopback interface" https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.service.8.html https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.s... > Was there some OTHER burning compelling use-case that makes you want to use 127.0.0.1:53 for some other purpose? The problem is... by default... resolvd routes ALL DNS REQUESTS to this stub by over writing resolv.conf with ONLY that socket and forcing you to configure resolvers elsewhere. And you have to manually reconfigure this if you want to change it and it forces you to get in the weeds way to much when all you want to do is add a DNS resolver. https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.service.8.html#/ETC/RESOLV.CONF https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.s... The confusing thing is why the heck is SYSTEMD an init system writing DNS resolvers? Seems out of it's scope in my opinion. I was surprised resolvd existed when I was trying to troubleshoot a DNS error caused by it.
  - johnny22 2y ago
    resolved is neither started by default on systemd nor required in any way. Your distro chose that.
    - the_real_cher 2y ago
      As most mainstream distros will just to fall in line with the standard. unless you want to use Arch at some point it will be the default for most Linux.
      - johnny22 2y ago
        there is no standard. it's just a tool that ships with systemd that some folks use and some don't.
        the_real_cher 2y ago
        yeah just like systemd right?
      - rerdavies 2y ago
        Isn't mainstream distros all doing the same thing a Very Good Thing Indeed?

jauntywundrkind 2y ago

Systemd doesn't. The systemd monorepo also provides systemd-resolvd which does, but this is optional and last I checked not included or at least started by default on Debian, for example.

the_real_cher 2y ago
Systemd-resolvd is started by default on my Ubuntu distro v24.
- jauntywundrkind 2y ago
  Good choice! It's great! If you really don't want it, it's super easy to disable: systemctl disable systemd-resolved
  - egorfine 2y ago
    If only it was that easy. Unfortunately, systemd-resolved is a sticky piece. You have to `apt-get uninstall` it, then `rm /etc/resolv.conf` and replace it with a sane file (`nameserver 1.1.1.1` or whatever). For previous versions I had to `chattr +x` as well because systemd stuff of course will not let me have my resolver.
    - vetinari 2y ago
      No, disabling, or at works masking is enough. `nameserver 1.1.1.1` is insane. Hope you don't ever have to use link-specific resolver.
      - the_real_cher 2y ago
        Link specific resolvers ONLY are insane. Why am I forced into nothing but link specific resolvers? Why cant I have a global default resolver anymore, with link specific as needed?
        2y ago

wongogue 2y ago

Stub resolver for systemd-resolved? Maybe check with what your distribution is shipping.

egorfine 2y ago
I believe systemd-resolved being the absolute worst part of the whole systemd ecosystem and especially the way it's packaged into Ubuntu.

favorited 2y ago

You're right – if I imagine systemd doing something else than what it does, I don't like it!

bigfatkitten 2y ago

I have no real complaints about systemd as an init system. I have plenty to say about systemd not staying in its lane. systemd's developers have formed a habit of deciding to implement something like an NTP client or DNS resolver, bringing a healthy dose of ignorance of how those services actually work, and then doubling down on their poor design decisions when problems are brought to their attention.

tapoxi 2y ago
But that's systemd the project, not systemd the init system. You don't need to use any of those components to use systemd, which has no dependencies on them. Those services can live and die on their own merits.
- bigfatkitten 2y ago
  They can ship as much trash as they like, so long as it doesn't become my problem. Those components become my problem when the distributions I choose to use choose to adopt them, and then I have to work around them.
  - tuna74 2y ago
    Choose something else then. If there is one thing the world is not lacking it is Linux distros.
    - bigfatkitten 2y ago
      As a hobbyist, sure. It's not quite that simple when I have commercial apps I need to run in a regulated environment.
      - growse 2y ago
        There's nothing about regulated environments or commercial apps that limit your choice to "systemd on Linux". Everything is a tradeoff.

the_real_cher 2y ago

resolvd was running by default on Ubuntu 24. I was struggling with it while trying to troubleshoot a VPN connection because resolvd automates resolve.conf into a generated file from several other files and will overwrite any other functionality trying to add resolvers to resolve.conf, like an internal VPN company resolver for example. Why is systemd even touching DNS? Seems a little outside of it's scope. This is kinda crazy to me personally when I found out resolvd was doing this. https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.service.8.html#/ETC/RESOLV.CONF https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/systemd-resolved.s...

tuna74 2y ago
"Why is systemd even touching DNS?" resolvd != systemd. It seems like you are mad that Ubuntu changed DNS resolver, but isn't that the actual job of a Linux distro?
- the_real_cher 2y ago
  the full name of the service is systemd-resolvd...
  - vetinari 2y ago
    yes, and full name of coreutils is GNU coreutils.
    - the_real_cher 2y ago
      systemd-resolvd is in the literal systemd code base. https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/main/src%2Fresolve https://github.com/systemd/systemd/tree/main/src%2Fresolve
      - vetinari 2y ago
        So are udev and nss modules. It's monorepo.