6 ms·
> Can anybody explain to me again why systemd is so bad ? It's huge, messy, has a poor bug and security history, obfuscates things that don't need obfuscating,
by kennysoona 2y ago
> Can anybody explain to me again why systemd is so bad ?
It's huge, messy, has a poor bug and security history, obfuscates things that don't need obfuscating, and is just generally IMO not a clean or efficient implementation. It's a very Windows style solution, very different from the lean and minimal stuff I like to run generally.
The advantages it provides are questionable, and are dwarfed by the issues it has had in the past IMO.
OpenRC perfectly meets my needs at present and my system boots incredibly quickly. When s6 is finished that situation will only be improved.
- robertlagrant 2y agoIt would be good to know if it's as ergonomic as systemd. I know it's not perfect, and sometimes the docs are confusing, but it is pretty simple to create a service that starts on boot etc. No scripts required, really.
- kennysoona 2y agoIt's pretty easy, you can add stuff to a 'local' script that runs last, or just create a new service and rc-update add new-service to start it on boot.
- robertlagrant 2y agoI'm not sure what's involved in the second of those options, but I think the first, if it means creating a shell script of some sort, is why people like systemd. It's config-driven, not script-driven. Now I'd be up for a better config format, or perhaps other implementations that use the systemd config format, but I think config is a pretty good idea.
- kennysoona 2y agoIt doesn't mean creating a shell-script, when you install a package it comes with an openrc script. rc-update add servicename just adds it to the list of services to start on boot. I have no problem with config, but openrc is simple and intuitive enough that no config file is needed.
- robertlagrant 2y agoSorry - I might've miscommunicated. That side of things sounds fine, but it's the creating of the script itself that I think is nicer as configuration.
- kennysoona 2y agoIf you need to create a script, and generally you don't, then you just copy a template that has start, stop and restart functions. Generally it's not more than launching an executable and killing a process or doing both. It's certainly not more complicated than authoring a unit file.
- egorfine 2y ago> OpenRC perfectly meets my needs What distro are you running?
- seemaze 2y agoI gave up systemd for openRC on Alpine. Much better suited to my own needs, and uptime is vastly improved.
- kennysoona 2y agoIt really is a world of difference. I think the only people really championing systemd are those that found writing scripts and futzing around too complicated. They wanted open-source Windows and they got it.
- kennysoona 2y agoAlpine. It's wonderful. I've always liked minimal distros, and Alpine actively facilitates that. It doesn't get in the way, has everything needed to run a modern desktop, and the focus on security and musl compatibility are huge pluses.
- egorfine 2y agoDon't worry, it's not for long. They are eyeing systemd port, too.
- kennysoona 2y agoNo they are not. Systemd is very incompatible with what Alpine is trying to and succeeding at doing. PostmarketOS which is based on Alpine switched to systemd, but I've seen nothing indicating Alpine is interested in doing so.
- egorfine 2y agoI have read somewhere that some kind of port is being discussed, perhaps at Phoronix, but I cannot find it now. Maybe I have confused something, so I stand corrected. systemd is indeed totally incompatible with musl libc.
- Vilian 2y agoHalf the things you said are straight up lies and the OpenRC is a good example how miniscule your world is
- kennysoona 2y ago> Half the things you said are straight up lies lol, no. > the OpenRC is a good example how miniscule your world is Weird attempt at an insult, but ok.