How to Crash Systemd in One Command
agwa.name
How to Crash Systemd in One Command
1–10 of 193 posts
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#2> "Systemd is defective by design."
The most succinct explanation of Systemd possible.
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#3It seems like it is quite fashionable to hate on systemd, and it seems like systemd is kindof a piece of crap - in some ways.
However, linux is missing basic functionality other os's offer, and systemd is showing up and trying to fill in those blanks. This is open source, if you don't like systemd, if you think it's crap, if you think there are obviously better ways to do it, well, what are you waiting for then?
Systemd is winning because they showed up and basically nobody else did. It's open source fork it and 'do it right'. Or point out the problems and hope that someone else will step up instead?
I think the world would better place if people spent less time griping and more time fighting to get their patch that fixes the problems merged. I guess coding is harder than writing blog posts though.
EDIT: I'm not saying systemd is perfect or even good. My point is that the people writing the code are going to have the final say, whether it's right or wrong, and it is unlikely that people writing blog posts lampooning it are really going to make a difference. I mean systemd has been despised and highly criticized from the beginning, and look where we are.
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#4Archived page, since it's not loading for me... http://archive.is/8xUSY
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#5This is an excellent writeup explaining without hysterics why systemd is terrible software. Unfortunately, I expect that this post will be brigaded by systemd-apologists anyways, denying newcomers to the debate the opportunity to hear the facts...
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#6It seems like it is quite fashionable to hate on systemd, and it seems like systemd is kindof a piece of crap - in some ways. However, linux is missing basic functionality other os's offer, and systemd is showing up and trying to fill in those blanks. This is open source, if you don't like systemd, if you think it's crap, if you think there are obviously better ways to do it, well, what are you waiting for then? Syst…
> "Systemd is winning because they showed up and basically nobody else did"
I can't see how you would qualify this statement, which is utterly false. Specifically, systemd adoption was the result of political pressure by LP (the author), who works at Red Hat. There are plenty of other choices out there. The idea that systemd won because of some kind of meritocracy is wrong. It was mostly political with some technical discussion at the edges. Most people "making the decision" actually just outsourced their critical thinking to the Debian Technical Committee. That's how we ended up with most distros adopting systemd. Systemd is better than sysvinit (for some values of "better"), and that is what the Debian TC voted on, and what caused them to adopt systemd. Not that systemd is better than other, more modern init systems.
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#7It seems like it is quite fashionable to hate on systemd, and it seems like systemd is kindof a piece of crap - in some ways. However, linux is missing basic functionality other os's offer, and systemd is showing up and trying to fill in those blanks. This is open source, if you don't like systemd, if you think it's crap, if you think there are obviously better ways to do it, well, what are you waiting for then? Syst…
> "Systemd is winning because they showed up and basically nobody else did" I can't see how you would qualify this statement, which is utterly false. Specifically, systemd adoption was the result of political pressure by LP (the author), who works at Red Hat. There are plenty of other choices out there. The idea that systemd won because of some kind of meritocracy is wrong. It was mostly political with some technical…
What are the other choices? Upstart was awful, and init is a hundred years old.
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#8I've been thinking for a bit that it's reasonably easy to write a PID 1 that reaps children and sends siginfo_t structs over a pipe to PID 2, which can be an init system as monolithic as you want.
Of course, it would also be simple for the kernel to allow PID 1 to die/crash, and just restart it instead of panicking. I don't know why the kernel continues to treat PID 1 so specially—if the ewontfix.com PID 1 is sufficient, it's simpler for the kernel not to bother with the reparenting logic and stop treating PID 1 as a special process.
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#9It seems like it is quite fashionable to hate on systemd, and it seems like systemd is kindof a piece of crap - in some ways. However, linux is missing basic functionality other os's offer, and systemd is showing up and trying to fill in those blanks. This is open source, if you don't like systemd, if you think it's crap, if you think there are obviously better ways to do it, well, what are you waiting for then? Syst…
Alternatives have been implemented before:
http://cr.yp.to/daemontools.html http://smarden.org/runit/
The more you look at any of DJB's software, the more of the future you'll see.
Re: How to Crash Systemd in One Command
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "Systemd is winning because they showed up and basically nobody else did" I can't see how you would qualify this statement, which is utterly false. Specifically, systemd adoption was the result of political pressure by LP (the author), who works at Red Hat. There are plenty of other choices out there. The idea that systemd won because of some kind of meritocracy is wrong. It was mostly political with some technical…
What are the other choices? Upstart was awful, and init is a hundred years old.
runit, openrc, s6, later nosh, bsdinit, take your pick.