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

Operating Systems Without Systemd

annihilatormodule.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 166 posts

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#151

Post by tssva »

JdeBP wrote: post #146
tssva wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the issue is a single module take over of userspace then I have good news for you. The systemd project is made up of multiple modules handling differing tasks not all of which you have to use.

Every time that this argument comes up, people don't get their computer science right. The problem is not whether something has modules. It is the degree of coupling amongst and cohesion within said modules that is the metric. * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19132437 * https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19028053

There is significant variety between distributions regarding which systemd project modules are used by default. Many distributions also allow systemd modules used by default to be easily replaced with non-systemd alternatives. This speaks to the level of coupling and cohesion between systemd modules being low enough that they don't form a monolith.

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#152

Post by bsg75 »

branon wrote: post #27

Plug for Void, the community recently added support[0] for the Pinebook Pro, so it's been my daily driver for a few months now. [0] https://github.com/void-linux/void-mklive/issues/105

Out of curiosity, what makes Void a preferred OS for you on a laptop compared to something “common” like Ubuntu or Fedora?

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#153

Post by microcolonel »

RunningDroid wrote: post #131
microcolonel wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> udev really shouldn't hard depend on systemd. I perfectly understand having some systemd specific integration, but why make it mandatory? udev is part of systemd now, because the systemd developers were the only ones willing to maintain it.

Doesn't the existence of eudev disprove that? (This is a serious question; I'm not trying to start a fight)

I think the existence of eudev proves that somebody is now willing to maintain a udev, but it wasn't always the case.

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#154

Post by robocat »

robocat wrote: post #103
nrclark wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed 100%. Systemd is a pretty good init system IMO. Service files are good, timers are good, dependency-based init is good. Easy sandboxing is nice. I absolutely _don't_ think that my init system should also be my bootloader. It also shouldn't manage my network configuration, or be responsible for controlling the system clock. And it shouldn't assert control of my home folders. And it shouldn't be spidering its wa…

> And it shouldn't be spidering its way into the Gnome login manager, which grew a systemd dependency a couple of years ago. gnome-shell used by the Gnome/Ubuntu login process also depends upon evolution-data-server !! See `apt-cache depends gnome-shell` for other dependencies... Debian chose systemd instead of upstart because of licensing, not features, according to https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/upstart

https://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2020/05/02/0/

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#155

Post by megous »

CuriousCosmic wrote: post #149
megous wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find systemd journals much more accessible. Instead of passing a log file to the tool, you pass journalctl's output to the tool, and you can serialize the output to any of the supported formats (incl. json) and use much more tools, more directly, than you could previously. Compare that with random older default debian log line from one of my systems: Feb 14 01:15:30 shakes kernel: [ 4.014481] [drm] No driver suppor…

My biggest issues personally are the lock-in of systemd overall and for journald the binary file format. If I could use journald on its own with OpenRC first and foremost and preferably have it store logs as text be it json or whatever then I would use it hands down. Journald just works for the most part and is much more convenient in most regards nowadays. If I remember correctly, interop was more of an issue before…

Hmm, that particular system is up since 2008, so maybe it inherited some config from that time during upgrades. :)

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#156

Post by marios »

JdeBP wrote: post #144
marios wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point, systemd introduced a RemainAfterExit= option, which killed all user started programs when the user logged out. IIRC, this is because of some misbehaving gnome application that wouldn't quit properly. Of course, since this hack solved the gnome bug, it was enabled by default by many, thus breaking applications like screen and tmux. What should have been done is fix the issue in whatever offending applic…

You have wildly mis-spelled "KillUserProcesses". * https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=825394#221

yes, indeed. Too late to edit now though :(

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#157

Post by marios »

majewsky wrote: post #108
marios wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At some point, systemd introduced a RemainAfterExit= option, which killed all user started programs when the user logged out. IIRC, this is because of some misbehaving gnome application that wouldn't quit properly. Of course, since this hack solved the gnome bug, it was enabled by default by many, thus breaking applications like screen and tmux. What should have been done is fix the issue in whatever offending applic…

> At some point, systemd introduced a RemainAfterExit= option, which killed all user started programs when the user logged out. IIRC, this is because of some misbehaving gnome application that wouldn't quit properly. The backstory is actually enlightening to me. To me, RemainAfterExit just seemed like the obvious sane decision and I actually wondered why it ever was different. When a user logs out, I absolutely want…

As pointed out by JdeBP, I confused RemainAfterExit= with KillUserProcess=. RemainAfterExit is an option indicating how systemd should process a unit file, while KillUserProcess is for systemd itself.

It's nice to know that libsystemd is not required in all cases, but I still have a problem with software having to be modified because systemd changes how libc's daemon() function behaves.

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#158

Post by isbjorn16 »

shawnz wrote: post #117
isbjorn16 wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then it should be on by default. Having to use journalctl instead of reading a plaintext file in /var/log should have resulted in a swift slap upside the noggin the moment it was first considered. I otherwise don't care about systemd, except for the more-than-one locations I might find an init script hiding on my system. It's fine. But don't make me use journalctl just to tail a god damned file like a normal person.…

What is the advantage to having to write all the log messages twice instead of once? What is the disadvantage in having to type "journalctl -f" instead of "tail -f"?

My usual "tail" is not tail -f, but tail -n 100. In fact, I jump around a ton doing tails and heads with varying linecounts, and if it gets unweildy even after all of that, that's when I pipe to less and look at it.

My major justification is I use tail and head constantly, every single day, and it's rarely on system logging. It's java logs, it's python logs, it's rust logs. I'm not going to be giving up tail or head any time soon.

Now I have to type "journalctl --help" every single time I want to look at a system or daemon log, which isn't super common, and when I do need to I'm already frustrated something isn't working.

Put another way, this is the exact WORST time to throw up more roadblocks over something. That's why I assert it should be logged twice, and for those who don't want it to be chewing up diskspace or want to relocate it, well, that's where you can configure it.

I just want my old log files back in their old locations without forcing me to sift through man pages when all I really want to do is figure out why the fucking bluetooth keeps dropping connection. I understand why others see this as a great step forward but it sounds more like the windows registry and event viewer to me than it does the configuration file and log file approach I adore from my unix systems. I'm sure the registry and event viewer has a lot of devoted fans as well; the difference is it's been there for most of my life (or at least, the parts where I was doing more than playing X-Wing vs Tie Fighter), which is why I mostly just wandered away. I'm not a sysadmin, I don't try to be and I don't want to be, and it seems like systemd is hellbent on forcing me to be one whether I want to be or not and I am so not here for it.

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#159

Post by CuriousCosmic »

megous wrote: post #155
CuriousCosmic wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My biggest issues personally are the lock-in of systemd overall and for journald the binary file format. If I could use journald on its own with OpenRC first and foremost and preferably have it store logs as text be it json or whatever then I would use it hands down. Journald just works for the most part and is much more convenient in most regards nowadays. If I remember correctly, interop was more of an issue before…

Hmm, that particular system is up since 2008, so maybe it inherited some config from that time during upgrades. :)

Not really on topic but this brings up a pain point that I wish more distros addressed. Sane defaults are obviously important and over time what classifies as the "ideal" default config changes. Most package managers seem to apply a default config on the first install and then never update it again.

At least from my experience, the only distro I have used that has offered any facilities in the package manager for handling config updates is Gentoo. Whenever there is a package update, if the default configuration files for the package change during an update, you are notified to run `etc-update`. This command then allows you to diff your current config with the new defaults, choose to use the entire file for the current config or the new default, or patch certain lines from the new default into your existing config.

Personally I find this super convenient, especially because whenever you perform a package update or install it will let you know whether you have any outstanding configuration files or important upgrade notes to address.

I'd be greatly interested to know if other package managers have these types of config and service management utilities. I looked around but I didn't really find anything.

Re: Operating Systems Without Systemd

#160

Post by TheGoddessInari »

microcolonel wrote: post #153
RunningDroid wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't the existence of eudev disprove that? (This is a serious question; I'm not trying to start a fight)

I think the existence of eudev proves that somebody is now willing to maintain a udev, but it wasn't always the case.

Eudev was forked in the immediate aftermath because systemd only cares about systemd. Even Torvalds strongly criticized systemd-udev maintainership[1].

1. https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/3/484

Post reply on HN