Live data from Hacker News

Systemd 252

github.com

191–200 of 317 posts

Re: Systemd 252

#191
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

nohup is POSIX, systemd is decidedly not. That makes it systemd’s responsibility not to break nohup, and more generally not to require non-admin users to be aware of it.

Nohup is a disgusting hack from a previous century. I don’t see how having less information on what is happening to a process good — nohup interprets supposedly meaningful signals never meant for this misuse differently. If you want to continue to run a process you have to start a service which is exactly that.

No, I don't have to do that at all, I can in fact use the standard unix way of making a process not terminate on SIGHUP by telling it to ignore SIGHUP.

SIGHUP is not a signal to shut down, it's a signal that says the controlling terminal is gone. The action taken by the process at that point is the decision of the process and the user that launched it, not the init system. This is exactly what it is for.

Changing that without understanding what people used it for across UNIX vendors for decades, was dumb. And it showed off just how little the writers of the service knew about how users actually use their systems. Huge red flag.

It's not just random long-running batch jobs it killed either, it seems that it would kill all sorts of useful stuff people run for reliability. The irony of the init system killing screen/tmux sessions which people run specifically to keep their shell going in case of a disconnect!

Re: Systemd 252

#192
post #185
post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is completely insane and gives lots of fuel to the systemd haters. Sorry, what exactly is the issue with a bunch of Linux maintainers working for Microsoft? Is there still some sort of collective adjustment issue with Microsoft being a major backer of Linux now? If the maintainers themselves (people who have dedicated their lives to progressing Linux) are ok with it, why does anyone else have an issue? And what…

And what kind of fuel would it add? That systemd has corporate backers? Systemd was 100% created by redhat, so no, corporate backers aren't the problem. The real problem is that Microsoft has historically tried to destroy linux, and beyond that, has a huge history of FUD and embrace and extinguish. Many in the OSS community consider Microsoft to be pure evil. And if their historical behaviour is any indication, nothi…

> The real problem is that Microsoft has historically tried to destroy linux, and beyond that, has a huge history of FUD and embrace and extinguish.

And now they're one of the major backers. All the work is being done in the open, so it's not like there's a nefarious hidden agenda there (an agenda that would have needed to somehow stay dormant for 10+ years).

The idea that working for Microsoft is something dirty that should be shunned for open source just doesn't make practical sense.

Re: Systemd 252

#193

It feels like the time is ripe for something simpler and more modern to replace* systemd. The timing of this release coincides with me being bitten with yet another bug** on the weekend. How long until “Systemd: The Good Parts”? *The most trivial new name would be système which would at least be in keeping with the French naming. **In Debian stable if you create a new user, ssh in as that user, logout, then delete th…

From the logind.conf man page [1]: > KillUserProcesses= > Takes a boolean argument. Configures whether the processes of a user should be killed when the user logs out. If true, the scope unit corresponding to the session and all processes inside that scope will be terminated. If false, the scope is "abandoned", see systemd.scope(5), and processes are not killed. Defaults to "no", but see the options KillOnlyUsers= an…

Ahhh, thanks. Now you mention it, wasn’t there some major scandal about this when it first shipped?

Re: Systemd 252

#194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are many reasons to not like systemd and the creator, who incidently after leaving the GNU/Linux is now working for the same company that sought to destroy it, Microsoft. I only learned about that a few days ago, here on HN (some thread or some old comment). It is completely insane and gives lots of fuel to the systemd haters. I do run both Debian (systemd) and Devuan (a Debian fork with all the systemd stuff…

> and there should be Linux distros packaged without systemd. systemd should be an optional package on all distros. Shoving it down throats is one of the valid major criticisms. What should have happened instead is systemd was optional on Debian at setup and Debian was forked to include it by default. It is simply backwards that Debian needed to be forked for purity. Duvuan shouldn't need to exist, but it very much d…

The primary definition of fascism, according to the Merriam Webster dictionary, is this:

> a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition

systemd has nothing to do with nation or race. There are much better words than fascism to describe Debian's prioritization of systemd.

Re: Systemd 252

#195
I have long been an advocate against systemd for the typical reasons (overreaching responsibilities, lock-in, lack of choice, software assumption "it will be there", complexity, driven by large corporate interests [see lock-in], being modeled after launched, etc etc). I feel like the chickens are coming home to roost.

That said, if one wants to use it, then use it. However, there are alternatives which I would love to see receive more adoption. I've been extremely happy with my Artix [1] system running s6 [2] init.

1. https://artixlinux.org/

2. https://skarnet.org/software/s6/

Re: Systemd 252

#196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what French naming?

I don't know if it was intended, but "système D" in French means hacking together something with whatever you have available. D meaning "démerde" (literally getting out of shit or a shitty situation) or "débrouille" depending on the language registry you want. It's a rather common expression.

Funny tidbit, sure. Basically "[made] from shit and sticks".

Re: Systemd 252

#197
post #188

I love systemd for deploying Golang, especially the security features, that systemd can own the TCP port for zero downtime deployments of the application and restarts of a fail-fast application. It kind of replaced Docker (dockerd) which I've used with deploying Scala and TS.

own the TCP port for zero downtime deployments of the It's not zero downtime, if the app isn't reaponding. And any infra that cares about uptime, has redundant instances. This feature is, IMO, a feel good feature.

It's zero downtime in that at no point does the kernel not respond to a TCP SYN packet and all those connections eventually get seen by the daemon. (Really useful for updating local services on Unix sockets.)

It's also much simpler than redundant instances, and applications are updated much more commonly than hardware failures so it's a cheap way to increase availability in practice.

And if your app can restart in a couple seconds... It might as well be zero downtime, and if not responding for a second is an issue, you have bigger issues.

Re: Systemd 252

#198
post #166

I just never get why people always flame on systemd. Sure, it's kinda bloated in the sense that it is "battery included" just like Python, but the intention to have a stable init with great system and service management is very good from both a DevOps and Sysadmin perspective. It is at least much better than writing your adhoc init.d script that may not guarantee to run on other Linux distros.

Systemd is a somewhat successful non-unix operating system, marketed to people who want a unix-like operating system using force. This isn't what anyone wants but you'll go along or they'll unleash a hell of sophistry about how this is "really" what everyone wants even if its the opposite, made up stories about the opponents, or only bad people don't want what we want and you don't want to be tagged as one of the bad…

> and you don't want to be tagged as one of the bad people so you're gonna say you officially love systemd, correct?

That does seem to be like weirdly a thing with redhat projects. I once saw someone say that being anti-systemd was correlated with supporting trump on hackernews, and of course if you don't like gnome you hate accessibility and poor people (who apparently don't know how to use less hobbled/phone-like user interfaces).

Re: Systemd 252

#199
post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think generally people view timers as a net superior alternative to crons: they have better logic for the times, they support dependencies, they support randomized delays, etc. Why do you think they're a real mess?

I guess their UX for a simple cron-like use-case. I remember trying to set it up and it wasn't a great experience. Just trying to see if others agree or not.

The arch wiki has really good documentation on them.

And they are so much more debuggable than cron it's insane, they are a lot easier for anything non-trivial.

Re: Systemd 252

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the logind.conf man page [1]: > KillUserProcesses= > Takes a boolean argument. Configures whether the processes of a user should be killed when the user logs out. If true, the scope unit corresponding to the session and all processes inside that scope will be terminated. If false, the scope is "abandoned", see systemd.scope(5), and processes are not killed. Defaults to "no", but see the options KillOnlyUsers= an…

Ahhh, thanks. Now you mention it, wasn’t there some major scandal about this when it first shipped?

There were a lot of noises made about it, yes, because people had been "nohup"ing things for decades, and using stuff like screen and tmux to keep sessions going over poor connections.

All of a sudden, without much warning, someone made the decision to kill all user processes on logout. It broke a lot of folks workflow.

Post reply on HN