51–60 of 464 posts
It has been said before, but it deserves mention, there are alternatives to Systemd out there, like OpenRC which has been around for a while, and other, newer projects like Uselessd. Of course, whether those other options will be as well supported and developed as systemd remains to be seen.
One thing I've realized about the Linux community through all this systemd flame warring is how unbelievably conservative a large subsection of it is. There's this huge so-called "neckbeard" continent that views anything architecturally beyond the 1980s as a huge affront to Unix. IMHO I kind of shrug at this, since Unix was never really all that great to begin with. Unix won because the only commercially viable and w…
Unix didn't beat Windows. Unix beat VMS and LISP machines and AS/400 and various other minicomputer operating systems. In fact, if we're talking about mainline commercial Unixes, NT started beating the shit out of them in the late 90s - if Unix lovers hadn't had the free ixen (Linux, BSDs) to fall back on it would be a sad state of affairs indeed.
>single parent hierarchy for namespaces Predictably, all the blame is laid at systemd's feet. The current churn is happening, because all of Linux's core developers (kernel and user space) are wanting that change...to push the envelope. For example, the current change in CGroup's namespaces are because kernel is mandating that the current cgroup access mechanism be deprecated. They want a single writer to Cgroups. Sy…
About udev, Linus has had multiple serious complaints about udev maintainership since GregKH passed it to Kay. Don't you recall the async firmware loading issue...
One thing I've realized about the Linux community through all this systemd flame warring is how unbelievably conservative a large subsection of it is. There's this huge so-called "neckbeard" continent that views anything architecturally beyond the 1980s as a huge affront to Unix. IMHO I kind of shrug at this, since Unix was never really all that great to begin with. Unix won because the only commercially viable and w…
People who aren't extremely familiar with how the Linux init system works and whose job doesn't include keeping the servers stable don't see why the neckbeards are up in arms about systemd, but there's good reason. Many peoples' jobs depends on making sure the servers are working, and knowing how the servers work is a big part of their job (and sanity). In its current incarnation, systemd changes the fundamentals of…
Hi, I'm a sysadmin who's fed up with neckbeards (most of who apparently don't know much and refuse to learn) claiming to speak for all sysadmins on this topic.
> large risk and little reward.
It's four years old, and claiming "large risk and little reward" is like listening to someone claim that moving from sendmail to postfix would be a disaster.
>single parent hierarchy for namespaces Predictably, all the blame is laid at systemd's feet. The current churn is happening, because all of Linux's core developers (kernel and user space) are wanting that change...to push the envelope. For example, the current change in CGroup's namespaces are because kernel is mandating that the current cgroup access mechanism be deprecated. They want a single writer to Cgroups. Sy…
To be clear, I'm not claiming that SysV init is The Best Way. Shell scripts are not the Happiest Place. But I am claiming that systemd is a crummy and overbearing replacement.
>single parent hierarchy for namespaces Predictably, all the blame is laid at systemd's feet. The current churn is happening, because all of Linux's core developers (kernel and user space) are wanting that change...to push the envelope. For example, the current change in CGroup's namespaces are because kernel is mandating that the current cgroup access mechanism be deprecated. They want a single writer to Cgroups. Sy…
If there were a couple of competing alternatives to manage your cgroups, sysadmins might not be so peeved. We're used to installing an alternative syslog daemon or cron daemon rather easily. But it's systemd or the highway, in the 3 or 4 most popular distros. About udev, Linus has had multiple serious complaints about udev maintainership since GregKH passed it to Kay. Don't you recall the async firmware loading issue…
Everything I read about SystemD is negative. Negative on the technology, negative on the people who created it. Nothing positive. How is it that SystemD is about to dominate the market? Who is driving SystemD adoption, and why?
It's so terrible (literally the devil incarnate, sacrifice your offspring now) that it's already been adopted by: - Arch Linux - Fedora/RHEL - openSUSE/SLES - Mageia - NixOS - CoreOS - Sabayon - Debian and Ubuntu in the near future > Everything I read about SystemD is negative. Negative on the technology, negative on the people who created it. Nothing positive. There's a vocal group that seem to think it's some Red H…
I have a hunch that for !RedHat, the motivation to switch comes just as much from not having to fight upstream (if not more so) than from systemd's relative merits. After all, there are plenty of different init systems, but only one of them is coupled to the rest of userspace to a significant degree.
Also, I wouldn't write off Solaris zones :) They're pretty powerful--in some ways, more so than LXC is today (syscall translation comes to mind).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there were a couple of competing alternatives to manage your cgroups, sysadmins might not be so peeved. We're used to installing an alternative syslog daemon or cron daemon rather easily. But it's systemd or the highway, in the 3 or 4 most popular distros. About udev, Linus has had multiple serious complaints about udev maintainership since GregKH passed it to Kay. Don't you recall the async firmware loading issue…
Here's a though: try remembering you don't speak for "sysadmins", you speak for yourself.
The article is right - it's not Linux as we know it anymore for better or worse.
Disagree!
1. FreeBSD has nothing like cgroups or namespaces. You can't apply cpu or memory limits to a whole jail, only individual processes in that jail.
2. it is early days for virtual network cards and ethernet bridging and jails: you have to recompile kernel to add VIMAGE.
One thing I've realized about the Linux community through all this systemd flame warring is how unbelievably conservative a large subsection of it is. There's this huge so-called "neckbeard" continent that views anything architecturally beyond the 1980s as a huge affront to Unix. IMHO I kind of shrug at this, since Unix was never really all that great to begin with. Unix won because the only commercially viable and w…
is also a current story on HN.
Just an example of how powerful that simple 70's Unix is. Allows features that appear "magical" to thorsten, anyway.
Windows? Wasn't really even an option... until 20 years later. And, of course, Unix really isn't that good, either. But, before you ignore it, please come to feature parity, at least.