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

Systemd 250 Released

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 204 posts

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#11

Post by traverseda »

ddingus wrote: post #7
ChuckMcM wrote: post #6

At this point any system that is running this should not be called "UNIX derived" or "UNIX like" as systemd has subsumed all of the pre-existing architecture around system startup and management. Not arguing if that is a good or bad thing just saying we should stop putting systemd managed systems in the 'UNIX' column just like we don't put Windows NT systems in the UNIX column.

Agreed, also no judgement here as well. I propose: "UNIX-ish" or Sysd type Linux. Shit, what am I thinking! GNU LINUX was the older discussion and development. SYSTEMD LINUX is likely most applicable nomenclature, given current development.

Well UNIX is "a pun on multics", so how about EUNICS? The S can stand for systemd.

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#12

Post by josephpoon »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #6

At this point any system that is running this should not be called "UNIX derived" or "UNIX like" as systemd has subsumed all of the pre-existing architecture around system startup and management. Not arguing if that is a good or bad thing just saying we should stop putting systemd managed systems in the 'UNIX' column just like we don't put Windows NT systems in the UNIX column.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, systemd/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, systemd plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning systemd system made useful by the systemd init system, IPC layer, and other vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the systemd system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of systemd which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the systemd system, developed by Red Hat. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use.

Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the systemd operating system: the whole system is basically systemd with Linux added, or systemd/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of systemd/Linux.

(/s)

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#13

Post by trabant00 »

Work hard and solve a big, complex set of problems. Solve them well. Offer the solution as free open source. Work some more to offer extra functionality and fix the bugs. Become the internet's villain.

Come up with a commercial solution to a simple problem. Ex: file sharing or password management. Make it slow, insecure, privacy violating, lose people's data. Make millions, become a hero.

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#14

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #6

At this point any system that is running this should not be called "UNIX derived" or "UNIX like" as systemd has subsumed all of the pre-existing architecture around system startup and management. Not arguing if that is a good or bad thing just saying we should stop putting systemd managed systems in the 'UNIX' column just like we don't put Windows NT systems in the UNIX column.

Would anyone care to explain to someone who isn't 1337 in the inner workings of Linux, why systemd makes modern Linux not very UNIXY anymore and why everyone seems to hate it to death?

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#15

Post by nyanpasu64 »

> systemd-homed now makes use of UID mapped mounts for the home areas. If the kernel and used file system support it, files are now internally owned by the "nobody" user (i.e. the user typically used for indicating "this ownership is not mapped"), and dynamically mapped to the UID used locally on the system via the UID mapping mount logic of recent kernels. This makes migrating home areas between different systems cheaper because recursively chown()ing file system trees is no longer necessary.

I wish it was possible to pull a hard drive from one Linux system, and plug it into another, and mount the ext4/etc. partitions in a "removable" mode which ignores permissions and mismatched UIDs, and grants full access to the files without needing to be root.

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#16

Post by kuhsaft »

rurban wrote: post #3

> The static lease DHCP server logic in systemd-networkd may now serve IP addresses outside of the configured IP pool range for the server. See, see, taking lessons from C++. So someone requested a bug, and they got it. How could that be useful?

I think there’s a misunderstanding. The [DHCPServer] section is tied to a [Network] unit. The [Network] unit has an address range. The [DHCPServer] section has options to reserve a range for dynamic leases. There is also [DHCPServerStaticLease] sections to assign static leases. However, previous versions of networkd did not allow the static lease to be outside of the [DHCPServer] dynamic range. Now, the static lease can be outside the dynamic range but within the network range. So, pretty much what any other standard DHCP server can do.

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#17

Post by teleforce »

This week I have just learned that systemd has an alternative scheduler in addition to cron.

At this rate systemd will probably become another new OS on top of Linux similar to Android.

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#18

Post by 3np »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #6

At this point any system that is running this should not be called "UNIX derived" or "UNIX like" as systemd has subsumed all of the pre-existing architecture around system startup and management. Not arguing if that is a good or bad thing just saying we should stop putting systemd managed systems in the 'UNIX' column just like we don't put Windows NT systems in the UNIX column.

I don’t follow how a new startup/system management architecture makes it “not UNIX”. We do put OS X in the UNIX column, after all. POSIX and all that.

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#19

Post by ddingus »

traverseda wrote: post #11
ddingus wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, also no judgement here as well. I propose: "UNIX-ish" or Sysd type Linux. Shit, what am I thinking! GNU LINUX was the older discussion and development. SYSTEMD LINUX is likely most applicable nomenclature, given current development.

Well UNIX is "a pun on multics", so how about EUNICS? The S can stand for systemd.

Lol

I used to care a lot more. Frankly, what I do now is make sure I can use an OS and that I am depending on more portable software where I can. I find myself in Windows, OSX, and Linux land, maybe now I should just say Systemd Linux land and pretty much have something other than the OS to worry about.

Ideally, the OS gives me few worries.

Re: Systemd 250 Released

#20

Post by theteapot »

ChuckNorris89 wrote: post #14
ChuckMcM wrote: post #6

At this point any system that is running this should not be called "UNIX derived" or "UNIX like" as systemd has subsumed all of the pre-existing architecture around system startup and management. Not arguing if that is a good or bad thing just saying we should stop putting systemd managed systems in the 'UNIX' column just like we don't put Windows NT systems in the UNIX column.

Would anyone care to explain to someone who isn't 1337 in the inner workings of Linux, why systemd makes modern Linux not very UNIXY anymore and why everyone seems to hate it to death?

This: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy#Do_One_Thing_a...
Post reply on HN