6 ms·

It's a lot easier for one systemd-loving company to switch to RHEL/CentOS/Fedora than for everyone else to deal with problems with systemd. systemd is at least

by pekk 13y ago

It's a lot easier for one systemd-loving company to switch to RHEL/CentOS/Fedora than for everyone else to deal with problems with systemd. systemd is at least controversial enough in ways that matter to Debian (portability off Linux, etc.) that I think it's nice not to have a monoculture here.

bkor 13y ago
What systemd problems? Please elaborate.
nailer 13y ago
Really? I've been away from Linux for a few years, but it used to be my career. I recently checked out systemd to make a service on a CoreOS box. systemd replaces so much overlapping logic, has config files for services rather than scripts, and uses an existing known config format. Basically everything that sucked about SysV init. What's not to like? Edit: I see you've added portability off Linux. That's a very small concern, and certainly lower than 'deep Linux integration' for most Linux users.
- pekk 13y ago
  Being better than SysV init is not something systemd has a monopoly on... Portability off Linux isn't a small concern for the Debian project as far as I know Red Hat related distros are very good distros based on systemd and are still available, it isn't necessary for Debian also to adopt systemd in order for people to use and enjoy it
  - Sanddancer 13y ago
    Debian has an active port to using the FreeBSD kernel, as well as a port to Hurd. So yes, portability off the Linux kernel is a concern to Debian.
- justin66 13y ago
  > I see you've added portability off Linux. That's a very small concern, and certainly lower than 'deep Linux integration' for most Linux users. It didn't help systemd's popularity that the people behind it have tried to do disgusting stuff like convince GNOME to make GNOME dependent on it, which doesn't just effect "portability off linux" but the portability of GNOME. (I don't believe they got that one through)
  - jff 13y ago
    Not just that, Poettering has said that he believes the only platform worth targeting is Linux.
    - nailer 13y ago
      Is Hurd successful? What about SmartOS? How any embedded boxes use BSD compared to Linux, vs ten years ago. Where's the trend headed?
  - bkor 13y ago
    What happened with GNOME is accurately described by myself in: http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/10/10/wayland-vs-usrsharexsessions/ http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/10/10/wayland-vs-usrsha... http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/09/25/gnome-and-logindsystemd-thoughts/ http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/09/25/gnome-and-loginds... I'm a GNOME release team member. We get really nice contributions from OpenBSD. But 100% of the development is done by people working on Linux. It has been that way since at least 5+ years. This "portability" complaints is IMO empty talk: actually contribute and make things happen. However, at the moment systemd will share various things across distributions and desktop environments, allowing GNOME developers to not need to maintain as much code as we do (e.g. the freedesktop.org ConsoleKit). I'm guessing people won't read the blogposts, but oh well :P
  - sandGorgon 13y ago
    this is incorrect. Gnome depends on logind which is one component of systemd and which has ALREADY been adopted by upstart itself [1] logind is basically a much better replacement for Consolekit (which is not actively maintained) and the Gnome devs want to use the other part of systemd (e.g. "systemd --user" ) to manage user sessions rather than write and maintain the code. It makes complete technical sense. [1] http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?78518-Ubuntu-Plans-To-Move-To-Systemd-s-Logind http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?78518-Ubuntu-Plans...
Shish2k 13y ago
In its defence, the portability problems are largely because the linux kernel has awesome features (ie, cgroups) and other kernels don't -- I think it's better for the world if we encourage the other OSes to add cgroups-like APIs to their kernels rather than hold linux back
- Sanddancer 13y ago
  Should the linux world have adopted the FreeBSD jail API rather than spinning their own lightweight containerization API?
  - bkor 13y ago
    Why turn things around? Systemd makes Linux specific features available. Nobody ever complained about FreeBSD having jails. Yet there are complaints that Linux has Linux-only features. So by using your FreeBSD jail example: Because there aren't any complaints regarding jails, systemd should not be complained about.
- riffraff 13y ago
  on the other hand wouldn't that imply that people can't innovate with other solutions in the same space (groups') because they are locked into it by the init system depending on it?
  - Shish2k 13y ago
    Common feature sets don't necessarily mean lack of innovation -- for a parallel I'd say kernels = web browsers and group APIs = html.

by pekk 13y ago

bkor 13y ago

What systemd problems? Please elaborate.

nailer 13y ago

Really? I've been away from Linux for a few years, but it used to be my career. I recently checked out systemd to make a service on a CoreOS box. systemd replaces so much overlapping logic, has config files for services rather than scripts, and uses an existing known config format. Basically everything that sucked about SysV init. What's not to like? Edit: I see you've added portability off Linux. That's a very small concern, and certainly lower than 'deep Linux integration' for most Linux users.

pekk 13y ago
Being better than SysV init is not something systemd has a monopoly on... Portability off Linux isn't a small concern for the Debian project as far as I know Red Hat related distros are very good distros based on systemd and are still available, it isn't necessary for Debian also to adopt systemd in order for people to use and enjoy it
- Sanddancer 13y ago
  Debian has an active port to using the FreeBSD kernel, as well as a port to Hurd. So yes, portability off the Linux kernel is a concern to Debian.
justin66 13y ago
> I see you've added portability off Linux. That's a very small concern, and certainly lower than 'deep Linux integration' for most Linux users. It didn't help systemd's popularity that the people behind it have tried to do disgusting stuff like convince GNOME to make GNOME dependent on it, which doesn't just effect "portability off linux" but the portability of GNOME. (I don't believe they got that one through)
- jff 13y ago
  Not just that, Poettering has said that he believes the only platform worth targeting is Linux.
  - nailer 13y ago
    Is Hurd successful? What about SmartOS? How any embedded boxes use BSD compared to Linux, vs ten years ago. Where's the trend headed?
- bkor 13y ago
  What happened with GNOME is accurately described by myself in: http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/10/10/wayland-vs-usrsharexsessions/ http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/10/10/wayland-vs-usrsha... http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/09/25/gnome-and-logindsystemd-thoughts/ http://blogs.gnome.org/ovitters/2013/09/25/gnome-and-loginds... I'm a GNOME release team member. We get really nice contributions from OpenBSD. But 100% of the development is done by people working on Linux. It has been that way since at least 5+ years. This "portability" complaints is IMO empty talk: actually contribute and make things happen. However, at the moment systemd will share various things across distributions and desktop environments, allowing GNOME developers to not need to maintain as much code as we do (e.g. the freedesktop.org ConsoleKit). I'm guessing people won't read the blogposts, but oh well :P
- sandGorgon 13y ago
  this is incorrect. Gnome depends on logind which is one component of systemd and which has ALREADY been adopted by upstart itself [1] logind is basically a much better replacement for Consolekit (which is not actively maintained) and the Gnome devs want to use the other part of systemd (e.g. "systemd --user" ) to manage user sessions rather than write and maintain the code. It makes complete technical sense. [1] http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?78518-Ubuntu-Plans-To-Move-To-Systemd-s-Logind http://phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?78518-Ubuntu-Plans...

Shish2k 13y ago

In its defence, the portability problems are largely because the linux kernel has awesome features (ie, cgroups) and other kernels don't -- I think it's better for the world if we encourage the other OSes to add cgroups-like APIs to their kernels rather than hold linux back

Sanddancer 13y ago
Should the linux world have adopted the FreeBSD jail API rather than spinning their own lightweight containerization API?
- bkor 13y ago
  Why turn things around? Systemd makes Linux specific features available. Nobody ever complained about FreeBSD having jails. Yet there are complaints that Linux has Linux-only features. So by using your FreeBSD jail example: Because there aren't any complaints regarding jails, systemd should not be complained about.
riffraff 13y ago
on the other hand wouldn't that imply that people can't innovate with other solutions in the same space (groups') because they are locked into it by the init system depending on it?
- Shish2k 13y ago
  Common feature sets don't necessarily mean lack of innovation -- for a parallel I'd say kernels = web browsers and group APIs = html.