3 ms·

I've used debian for 15 years and I'm looking for a replacement because systemd. The turning point was systemd breaking a fully functional system and forcing i

I've used debian for 15 years and I'm looking for a replacement because systemd. The turning point was systemd breaking a fully functional system and forcing it into recovery mode which was simply broken and going in an infinite loop of displaying it was about to offer a recovery terminal which never came. Not having log as text and useless info from systemctl and journalctl instead of the useful info I had in traditional logs played a significant part and the attitude and position of the systemd guys too. This debian forums post sums it all: From my (relatively short) experience with systemd as init I find that systemd (at least as packed in debian) is really far from being ready. Even the slightest unexpected (to systemd) configuration will make it break from all sides, and even the so-called emergency shell is painfully broken. Together with both the upstream and downstream (debian maintainer) attitude ("this is not a bug, fix your configuration so that it matches our expectations, which by the way change every day and we don't tell you about it" -- i.e. the exact opposite of Linus/kernel's attitude "we don't break userspace").

baldfat 12y ago
Arch users made the switch a long time back. When switching to systemd it isn't just install and go. Systemd is mature and reliable and is running on so many servers it isn't even funny. I personally like it and it is much better for me to admin my services on servers.
- josteink 12y ago
  > When switching to systemd it isn't just install and go. This I can definitely agree with. Has debian said anything about replacing sysvinit on existing installs or will they just be using systemd as the default on new ones? The latter would from my point of view be a reasonable compromise and shouldn't alienate anyone.
  - chaosesqueteam 12y ago
    Yes. The systemd people are in control of the decision making process in debian now. They have decided that an upgrade to jessie will silently replace sysV with systemd. They have rejected all other arguments. Honestly, these truly are authoritarian scumbags. Linux is finished. And it happened quickly too.
- bigbugbag 12y ago
  I replaced sidux by arch on my personal laptop 5 years ago and I'm looking for a replacement distro for this usage too. my experience with systemd on my arch laptop isn't one I would say is mature and reliable. When a service that used to work now fails to start and the only information systemd gives is that it failed to start, I find the only reliable things is that it fails to provide relevant information to allow me to get out of the situation the way I could with logs before systemd.

baldfat 12y ago

Arch users made the switch a long time back. When switching to systemd it isn't just install and go. Systemd is mature and reliable and is running on so many servers it isn't even funny. I personally like it and it is much better for me to admin my services on servers.

josteink 12y ago
> When switching to systemd it isn't just install and go. This I can definitely agree with. Has debian said anything about replacing sysvinit on existing installs or will they just be using systemd as the default on new ones? The latter would from my point of view be a reasonable compromise and shouldn't alienate anyone.
- chaosesqueteam 12y ago
  Yes. The systemd people are in control of the decision making process in debian now. They have decided that an upgrade to jessie will silently replace sysV with systemd. They have rejected all other arguments. Honestly, these truly are authoritarian scumbags. Linux is finished. And it happened quickly too.
bigbugbag 12y ago
I replaced sidux by arch on my personal laptop 5 years ago and I'm looking for a replacement distro for this usage too. my experience with systemd on my arch laptop isn't one I would say is mature and reliable. When a service that used to work now fails to start and the only information systemd gives is that it failed to start, I find the only reliable things is that it fails to provide relevant information to allow me to get out of the situation the way I could with logs before systemd.