Earlier quoted context omitted.
I did not say anything about containers.
One service per server? That seems incredibly wasteful.
One service per kernel. Hypervisors allow you to run many kernels on the same physical hardware.
Systemd 252
231–240 of 317 posts
Re: Systemd 252
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can run virtually any Windows application on top of Systemd already via Wine. Unless you have some particular attachment to the NT kernel, there near zero reasons to use Windows today.
If only that were true. "Virtually any Windows application" is a fantasy I'm afraid, many important applications run poorly or not at all on Linux. Then there's the "particular attachment to the NT kernel" caused by driver support for $HARDWARE - there's tons of niche hardware that just can't be driven from Linux. If you use a computer for actual industrial work , you will hit one of these problems very quickly.
Can you give an example? Even modern AAA games run as well, and often better, on Linux these days.
Re: Systemd 252
#233It 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…
Don't we already have multiple, alternate systems that are significantly simpler?
The primary reason why I don't use systemd at all, on any desktop or server I manage, is not that I think it isn't powerful or reliable but, I cannot fit it into my head.
The scope and complexity of it goes beyond what I'm personally willing to invest into any one subsystem designed to regulate my operating system.
I find that because I can't easily integrate day to day systemd operations into my general knowledge of the Unix / Linux shell environment, it essentially creates a cognitive switching cost that I'm not willing to pay given the efficiency and utility I get from my existing knowledge and skills.
Systemd seems to work well for a lot of people, but doesn't sell itself to me given my objective, and capacity, to internalize simpler tools for high levels of mastery.
That's why I don't use systemd but do use other, more simpler systems, that are readily available.
Re: Systemd 252
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait, what French naming?
"e" following "d" in the alphabet, the successor to systemd would be called "systeme", which is the french translation (système) for "system".
Thanks, but I was refering to the "...in keeping with the French naming" part, as if systemd previously had a french name or something
Re: Systemd 252
#235Earlier 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.
ah, that makes sense, thanks for the explanation.
Re: Systemd 252
#236systemd is fine for single user systems and perhaps verts, but I would never deploy it on a server. The deprecation of cgroup v1 is a welcome change. It's come a long way, but it still has a very long way to go.
Facebook runs lots of Systemd but I'm sure on your infrastructure you couldn't run it.
I imagine Facebook uses highly monitored virts that are spawned and destroyed constantly. I really wouldn't call them "servers" more like instances or staging hosts for containers. Root exploits aren't so serious in a ethereal state..
Re: Systemd 252
#237Small detail, but interesting to see varlink capabilities added.
systemd-resolvd gains "monitor" capabilities via the lightweight json rpc system varlink.
definitely useful just for monitoring dns broadly, seeing whats happening on the system. there's probably some more specific creative uses folks could hack together here.
Re: Systemd 252
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are solid technical reasons for systemd's binary logging. The nice thing about its binary log format is that it's organised by fields which are indexed for quicker searching and filtering. It's much easier and faster to analyse these logs than the traditional text-based ones. Also, having journald authenticate the process that is sending it log entries, and the log sealing capability, are two features that can…
For me, the nice things about the systemd journal binary log format are: - It's immediately compressed (without having to wait for a log rotation); - It automatically rotates when a size limit is reached (no risk of filling the disk with logs); - IIRC, it's deduplicated (repeated messages use less disk space). All of these together means logs can be kept for much longer by default.
Overall agree. The only problem is if you have file corruption it could be a problem to parse. But I usually don't change the default.
Re: Systemd 252
#239About removing support for what they call split-usr and unmerged-usr: Why does a init system and daemon manager even need suppport for a certain directory layout, shouldn't it be agnostic? Having a separate usr-space saved my bacon in the past a couple of times. The thing I dislike most about Systemd is that it leads to homogenisation, where to me, running Linux is about choice.
http://www.islinuxaboutchoice.com/ >where to me, running Linux is about choice. Quote : "From: Adam Jackson To: Development discussions related to Fedora Subject: Linux is not about choice [was Re: Fedora too cutting edge?] Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 15:58:45 -0500 > Linux is about choice. If I could only have one thing this year, it would be to eliminate that meme from the collective consciousness. It is a disease. It s…
Hah, I knew somebody was going to post this and almost added a disclaimer.
When I say Linux, I'm talking about Linux distributions. Not the bare kernel, not embedded Linux.
If I choose to use Linux over macOS or Windows, the #1 reason is that it gives me greater choice. On the desktop, to choose different desktop environments, to customize it to a greater extent than what is possible on other platforms. (That even applies to some extent to the server, I can choose from a greater selection of alternative services and am more flexible than in the Windows Server world, where it is more often a IIS, MSSQL, .NET stack.)
If I don't value choice, than frankly there is very little to make me choose Linux over whatever is preinstalled on my Laptop. I used to have fun tinkering with my Linux installation and developing my own tools and workflows etc., but now that I'm older and don't have so much disposable time I prefer something that is good enough out of the box. I'm sure many people can relate.
If the greater Linux community still embraced "Linux is about choice", and I could still run stuff in the "mix and match" spirit of ca. 2009, but with a modern kernel and modern apps, then I would immediately switch to desktop Linux. But you can't choose your window decorations, themes, desktop panels independently anymore and get a somewhat matching look and feel. It's only Gnome island, KDE/Plasma island, and hacker-minimalist island.
Re: Systemd 252
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook runs lots of Systemd but I'm sure on your infrastructure you couldn't run it.
I imagine Facebook uses highly monitored virts that are spawned and destroyed constantly. I really wouldn't call them "servers" more like instances or staging hosts for containers. Root exploits aren't so serious in a ethereal state..
They use lots of different things for lots of different things I would assume.
Also most people today use virtualization.