211–220 of 332 posts
- The developers had a condescending approach and ignored the wider community.
- Simple things like log files no longer being plain text. Obtuse.
- Arguably designed to inject unneeded complexity that will cause money to flow into big orgs. 1.2 million lines of code vs shell scripts. Just wow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use archlinux as a daily driver, but it breaks far more randomly than gentoo ever did for me. Archlinux's bugzilla is full of random breakages that happen at random system updates. Here's a random python bug that been happening, cost me a couple of hours to debug and for now I don't update python until they get around fixing it[1]. The fix? Download an older python version(not too old since that would break everyth…
The official Arch stance seems to be "You should have read the blog before updating", and I enforce that by updating maybe 3 times a year at most. I think I'm just used to the installer. I like doing everything by CLI. Ubuntu is always trying to push something odd like Snap, and I think Xubuntu is defunct. The Ubuntu installers are very opinionated on what kind of desktop they want you to have. One of these days I'll…
I used systemd for a time, and after looking into all the documentation I found it hard to understand and it's scope overreaching. It doesn't stand by the unix philosophy of mechanism not policy and is prescriptive in it's inplementation. As another comment stated, the politics behind how it was pushed never sat right with me and I believe it is leading the Linux community to vendor lock in. I have been using s6 on A…
Another happy s6 user here, and pretty much for the same reasons. I like the clear supervision process tree it creates. I'm not sold on the execline syntax, but it's relatively clean and easy to work with and since I already use a configuration management system, generating custom startup files (from a single template) isn't that much of a challenge. I'm currently exploring how to generate minimal service environment…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
it's kind of like locked bootloaders and pentalobe screwdrivers for organizing a unix system where most users were used to easy to inspect and modify scripts and single purpose programs . yes, it's still open source, but modifications and inspection are far more complicated creating a much higher barrier to entry. in the earlier days when it was still buggy, even linus himself was screaming about not being able to ea…
Right. I have a simple rule: don’t use a GNU/Linux system that uses systemd. It doesn’t respect the Unix philosophy. It’s trying to turn it into Windows. I’m waiting for Microsoft to buy Red Hat. Failing that, IBM.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It seems “designed for job security” or more likely designed for consulting revenue. Exactly this, yes; and that's why it was pushed the way it was. I dread the day when systemd or an init system just like it consumes the BSD world.
I feel the same way about Postgres. It's powerful but it's insanely arcane and full of land mines and footguns. It's great for forcing you to hire consultants, DBAs, or pay cloud providers a lot to run it for you.
I am old enough to remember that problems with systemd were less technical and more political. People didn't like the way systemd developers pushed the community to adopt systemd, specially when they asked for 3rd party developers to make systemd a hard dependency. Unfortunately,people don't remember this today, and think users resisted to systemd adoption only because they didn't like systemd.
> enough to remember We are talking 10 years ago, not 1975 here. Unless everybody is 25 years old on HN...
Systemd pissed off many people. For me and most users, the transition was fully imperceptible. With the difference that systemctl tools seem to work better for what it does than the many sparse different tools it replaced.
I like systemd, but I abhor the arrogance and manouvering with which is was pushed.
People using non Systemd distros, like Gentoo, Guix and other, are missing anything important?
I used systemd for a time, and after looking into all the documentation I found it hard to understand and it's scope overreaching. It doesn't stand by the unix philosophy of mechanism not policy and is prescriptive in it's inplementation. As another comment stated, the politics behind how it was pushed never sat right with me and I believe it is leading the Linux community to vendor lock in. I have been using s6 on A…
Another happy s6 user here, and pretty much for the same reasons. I like the clear supervision process tree it creates. I'm not sold on the execline syntax, but it's relatively clean and easy to work with and since I already use a configuration management system, generating custom startup files (from a single template) isn't that much of a challenge. I'm currently exploring how to generate minimal service environment…
I _think_ I did something similar to what you mention, though I'm not familiar with guix. Analogous to systems, what I _did_ like about systemd was the user level service management. So I essentially kick off a user privileged supervision tree for my session with s6 with its own scandir and service db when launching X. It is not under the root supervision tree but lives side by side at this moment since 1) I wasn't aware of s6-usertree-maker at the time and 2) i wanted any user to be able to kick off user privileged services without root intervention (e.g. setting up usertree-maker)