Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

naftuli.wtf

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 272 posts

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#141

Post by vbernat »

tannhaeuser wrote: post #135

Best thing of systemd is that it's putting people behind alternate systemd-free Linuxen. Devuan, Alpine, Gentoo, Void (and particularly the BSDs) come along nicely. I can tolerate systemd on desktops as long as I don't have to deal with it. The moment it craps out with Java-esque error traces in binary logs I'll install Slackware (or is there a modern desktop Linux without systemd I'm not aware of?). Other than for d…

> (Re-)starting and stopping a daemon isn't rocket science; it's like 10 lines of shell code.

That's why half of the SysV-style scripts to restart call sleep. No such unreliable hacks with systemd...

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#142

Post by noinsight »

digi_owl wrote: post #123
krylon wrote: post #117

At the risk of sounding heretical, I kind of find myself in the middle ground regarding systemd - I was initially highly skeptical of it, and I still think it's problematic that it is so Linux-centric and will cause problems maintaining software to run both on Linux/systemd and on *BSD. The way it was pushed on distros was problematic, in my opinion. But having used a couple of Linux systems running systemd - Raspian…

Some parts may be useful, some parts are downright awful, but the clincher is that it is all a big wadded up ball of code. Damn it, the LFS team basically adopted eudev, of Gentoo fame, because extracting udev from systemd required manual intervention over and over.

> a big wadded up ball of code.

To be clear, they're all under the same umbrella project, but separate components and not everything is in PID 1. People seem to be confused by that.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#143

Post by digi_owl »

pmlnr wrote: post #140
krylon wrote: post #117

At the risk of sounding heretical, I kind of find myself in the middle ground regarding systemd - I was initially highly skeptical of it, and I still think it's problematic that it is so Linux-centric and will cause problems maintaining software to run both on Linux/systemd and on *BSD. The way it was pushed on distros was problematic, in my opinion. But having used a couple of Linux systems running systemd - Raspian…

> I had no problems with it. You're lucky. For me, systemd randomly fails to execute a reboot, then, because of this, fails to do halt, and I have to force power off the machine. And this is just one.

Freedesktop, recreating Windows one project at a time...

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#144

Post by AnonymousPlanet »

digi_owl wrote: post #95

More and more systemd is becoming symptomatic of deeper divide within the Linux "community". The split being between those that embraced Linux for being a free, in both senses, _nix unburdened by AT&T and running on commodity hardware, and those that got to know it after the dot-com crash as the L in LAMP. The former cares for Linux as a _nix, the latter could not care less about _nix and may see it as a vestigial ap…

I'm not so sure if it really has that much to do with heritage. A lot of us like the design principles you can see in Unix and that are pretty much absent in systems like Windows NT. They very much reflect the conclusions I came to after over fifteen years of building and debugging systems.

But, yes, I have the impression that a lot of Linux users would just as gladly use a modern BeOS or a ReactOS, regardless of the underlying design.

And a lot of systemd criticism comes from people who are just averse to any kind of change and maybe long for the bygone days of HP-UX and Irix.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#145

Post by digi_owl »

fnj wrote: post #116
agumonkey wrote: post #20

Systemd ideas I'm all for but it only hints at linux lack of clean abstraction power. sysvinit was full of redundancy; apparently BSD found a way to make a thin abstraction layer to make init files clean. Bash isn't "good" at hinting proper abstractions, I rarely see talks about this, maybe gurus can see through the rain. I keep seeing a place for a tiny lambda friendly intermediate layer .. Just so you can compose p…

> sysvinit was full of redundancy; apparently BSD found a way to make a thin abstraction layer to make init files clean. They are completely different systems of init scripts. Just for starters, BSD does not have run levels, so the rcn.d directories and the maze of symlinks do not exist. BSD init scripts themselves are much simpler mostly because there is a good system of helper functions which they all use, rather t…

Why i can't stop thinking that when Freedesktop people say there is a problem with Linux, they really mean there is a problem with Fedora...

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#146

Post by tannhaeuser »

dijit wrote: post #136
tannhaeuser wrote: post #135

Best thing of systemd is that it's putting people behind alternate systemd-free Linuxen. Devuan, Alpine, Gentoo, Void (and particularly the BSDs) come along nicely. I can tolerate systemd on desktops as long as I don't have to deal with it. The moment it craps out with Java-esque error traces in binary logs I'll install Slackware (or is there a modern desktop Linux without systemd I'm not aware of?). Other than for d…

SystemD was so polarizing for me, I was a Fedora user and RHEL user for work- but it started consuming everything and giving really bizarre issues... I tried reaching out and explaining to people that it wasn't working in the way I expected or, asking them to point me towards the docs so I can at least learn how to use journalling properly so it doesn't hide issues from me.. and was met with some hostility. When I as…

If you're deep into Fedora/RHEL, maybe you can make sense of the fakesystemd situation [1]. Supposedly fakesystemd helps to provide at least a systemd-free Docker container. I'd definitely hate to see CentOS/RHEL go away (which I've come to appreciate as a predictable, if conservative, Linux distro in the past).

[1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1118740

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#147

Post by digi_owl »

nictrix wrote: post #78
awinder wrote: post #6

I don't know if I'm just crazy but I did enjoy working with upstart for the brief time that I did, much more so than systemd or initv.

I agree, Upstart was great for most things and was simple to understand. Though I ran into some difficult fork, exec issues for certain processes. I sometimes had to run a wrapper to use upstart, but those seemed to be edge cases. I'd prefer if we stuck with Upstart and improved on it, though it already seems like a distant dream.

I sometimes wonder if edge cases are inherently fractal. take care of one and two more spawn.

Thus when i see some dev talk about exorcising edge cases because of user friendliness i see them preaching a fools errand.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#148

Post by dom0 »

FeepingCreature wrote: post #14

I'd probably respect SystemD a lot more if it measured itself against a modern init system like Gentoo's OpenRC instead of pretending it's invented dependency handling. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems > OpenRC provides a number of features touted as innovative by recent init systems like systemd ...

(Or Solaris SMF)

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#149

Post by dom0 »

digi_owl wrote: post #125
AstralStorm wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As well as logging daemon, dbus daemon, session manager, device node manager and many other things.

That session manager, logind, is a particular mess. Here you have a daemon that ties into PAM that tries to second guess the kernel regarding what constitutes a session. Effectively systemd is becoming something akin to Android. It may be using the Linux kernel, but it is not the GNU/Linux we have grown familiar with over the years.

systemd session handling is also particularly joyful to debug.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#150

Post by digi_owl »

noinsight wrote: post #142
digi_owl wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some parts may be useful, some parts are downright awful, but the clincher is that it is all a big wadded up ball of code. Damn it, the LFS team basically adopted eudev, of Gentoo fame, because extracting udev from systemd required manual intervention over and over.

> a big wadded up ball of code. To be clear, they're all under the same umbrella project, but separate components and not everything is in PID 1. People seem to be confused by that.

Plenty of the "separate" components share core code at compile time. If they were truly separate they could be downloaded piecemeal and compiled independently.
Post reply on HN