6 ms·

> Why run something terrible (systemd) It is terrible only because you say it is. It's been a massive help for us in adopting it, and accepting the help it off

> Why run something terrible (systemd) It is terrible only because you say it is. It's been a massive help for us in adopting it, and accepting the help it offers makes custom software systems a lot easier to write in a robust way. It's only "terrible" if you have axe to grind about the "right" way and then define that as daemontools.

cgag 11y ago
I use systemd to start runit which is like daemontools. I consider daemontools/runit it right because they gives me all the benefits I'd want out of systemd (not doing anything special to daemonize my process, supervision, log handling) while being much simpler and more well tested.
- KirinDave 11y ago
  > while being much simpler The sum of the init functional that can deliver what systemd is doing (and it is good to do those things) is more complex than a suite of tools for launching daemons in an unhelpful environment. Sure. I submit the universal configuration file tooling is fantastic in a day and age where we provision and configure machines with template-based tools like salt and ansible rather than synchronized command tools like puppet.
  - cgag 11y ago
    I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Is it that it's nice to be able to copy over a systemd service template file with ansible vs running commands to start services? If so, how is that different from copying runit service files instead? If not, can you elaborate / reword?
    - KirinDave 11y ago
      Sorry, that post was on mobile. Honestly, I do not relish posting on this terrible corner of the internet. But I'll respond, and it's better late than never. There are 2 things: 1. Systemd's boot process does more (and shows better performance and in some cases better resilience). So while many people complain it is more complicated and this is true; it is still very simple for what it is doing (which is much more than daemontools). 2. Runit and monit and stuff all eventually appeal to launcher shell scripts. You do not 'copy' these over with ansible in a real operational deployment, you 'generate' them with profile-specific variables (e.g., beta vs production, datacenter-specific values, etc). Template generation of shell scripts is MUCH more subtly error prone than generating configuration files with simpler grammar and static correctness checks. Systemd makes more functionality available as a configuration option as opposed to functionality available via shell scripting. I think that makes it much better.
scurvy 11y ago
I have an axe to grind about the way it was introduced. Fedora and Red Hat massively mis-managed it. Previously, they introduced various things in tech preview releases, and it either stayed or went with subsequent releases. systemd was thrust upon us by an axe-grinding developer.
- icebraining 11y ago
  Sounds like your problem is with Red Hat, not systemd.
- hactually 11y ago
  What axe did they grind? I've got only good things to say about systemd so perhaps I can't understand the issue?
- rodgerd 11y ago
  So, stupid politics rather than technical merit.
jamiesonbecker 11y ago
> It's only "terrible" if you have axe to grind about the "right" way and then define that as daemontools. Conversely, It's only "terrible" if you have axe to grind about the "right" way and then define that as systemd.

cgag 11y ago

I use systemd to start runit which is like daemontools. I consider daemontools/runit it right because they gives me all the benefits I'd want out of systemd (not doing anything special to daemonize my process, supervision, log handling) while being much simpler and more well tested.

KirinDave 11y ago
> while being much simpler The sum of the init functional that can deliver what systemd is doing (and it is good to do those things) is more complex than a suite of tools for launching daemons in an unhelpful environment. Sure. I submit the universal configuration file tooling is fantastic in a day and age where we provision and configure machines with template-based tools like salt and ansible rather than synchronized command tools like puppet.
- cgag 11y ago
  I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Is it that it's nice to be able to copy over a systemd service template file with ansible vs running commands to start services? If so, how is that different from copying runit service files instead? If not, can you elaborate / reword?
  - KirinDave 11y ago
    Sorry, that post was on mobile. Honestly, I do not relish posting on this terrible corner of the internet. But I'll respond, and it's better late than never. There are 2 things: 1. Systemd's boot process does more (and shows better performance and in some cases better resilience). So while many people complain it is more complicated and this is true; it is still very simple for what it is doing (which is much more than daemontools). 2. Runit and monit and stuff all eventually appeal to launcher shell scripts. You do not 'copy' these over with ansible in a real operational deployment, you 'generate' them with profile-specific variables (e.g., beta vs production, datacenter-specific values, etc). Template generation of shell scripts is MUCH more subtly error prone than generating configuration files with simpler grammar and static correctness checks. Systemd makes more functionality available as a configuration option as opposed to functionality available via shell scripting. I think that makes it much better.

scurvy 11y ago

I have an axe to grind about the way it was introduced. Fedora and Red Hat massively mis-managed it. Previously, they introduced various things in tech preview releases, and it either stayed or went with subsequent releases. systemd was thrust upon us by an axe-grinding developer.

icebraining 11y ago
Sounds like your problem is with Red Hat, not systemd.
hactually 11y ago
What axe did they grind? I've got only good things to say about systemd so perhaps I can't understand the issue?
rodgerd 11y ago
So, stupid politics rather than technical merit.

jamiesonbecker 11y ago

> It's only "terrible" if you have axe to grind about the "right" way and then define that as daemontools. Conversely, It's only "terrible" if you have axe to grind about the "right" way and then define that as systemd.