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

Systemd redux: The end of Linux

blog.lusis.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 464 posts

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#341

Post by fit2rule »

seivadmas wrote: post #244
badgersandjam wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had no opinion on systemd until yesterday. In fact I had a glace or two at the code and it's pretty clean and I liked the rough objectives laid out. I installed CentOS 7 on a machine last night that we're replacing CentOS 6 on and was poked in the face with timedatectl and dbus problems for an entire hour, some of which were intermittent. Debugging these issues is a horrific pain. I lost 4 hours on it. I've never l…

You know this is funny, I remember reading comments EXACTLY like this about 3-4 years ago but with pulseaudio in place of systemd. Pulseaudio was Lennart's previous project. It broke everything in linux sound for a while, everybody moaned and hated it and said it was the worst thing since the crucifixion of Christ. Yet, name one problem you had with sound on linux in the past year? There are very few. Pulseaudio now…

Your pulseaudio example is naive, because this: pulseaudio broke audio for many professionals who were already using JACK and ALSA. This is why the upheaval is criticized.. Whats being done to improve things caters only to a low common denominator; it doesn't push the state of the art forward.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#342

Post by fit2rule »

diltonm wrote: post #288
onli wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulseaudio still has problems. Sound suddenly being muted, it using the wrong alsamixer settings, sound being garbled until you pass in arcance settings or change it back to Alsa. Granted, the error might be more in part of the rest of the ecosystem, though I doubt it. But it is sadly far from "just use pulseaudio and everything will work instantly". And if it works, there is no need to think that Alsa alone wouldn't…

Strange I don't see the issues you're talking about I use Ubuntu Desktop on a variety of desktops and laptops. I'd say PA was stable by Ubuntu 12.04. I do Skype and Google Talkplugin (now Hangouts).

Try using it with JACK and setting up a DAW.. then you'll see the pain.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#343

Post by e12e »

pjmlp wrote: post #124
digi_owl wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if journald goes belly up, no logs for syslog...

As if syslog cannot go belly up as well.

Lets assume for the sake of argument that logind (a new codebase) is about as stable as syslog (anyone of which are several years old, well tested). Layering one on top of the other, you now have doubled the chance of one of them going belly up.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#344

Post by nitrogen »

general_failure wrote: post #269
nitrogen wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Systemd is most problematic because of its own-everything monolithic nature, and the changing of kernel interfaces to match. The vast majority of Linux systems are not desktops, and probably not servers either. The kernel and the core utilities around it (like init) should be designed with multiple implementations and all machine types in mind. This means phones, set top boxes, TVs, routers, automation hardware, supe…

Your comment is the very definition of FUD. You have nonfacts just baseless fear.

I developed and marketed my own embedded Linux products. It would have been difficult to do some of the customizations I did if the kernel, DHCP server, logging system, HAL/udev, etc. were all adapted to the one systemd way of doing things with dbus.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#346

Post by davexunit »

anonbanker wrote: post #303
davexunit wrote: post #19

I'm quite happy to be a part of the development team for GNU Guix, a distro that is not using systemd. I'm not a systemd hater, but it's definitely not for me and I'm not thrilled with the direction that development is going. It's a shame that sysvinit and friends are so bad that using systemd is the best option we have right now. Maybe GNU dmd will be able to stand up to it someday.

I'm looking forward to switching to Guix as soon as it reaches beta. All this POSIX breakage and LGPL exploitation is making me double down on GNU.

Glad you are interested! If you are brave, you can try out the distro and report the issues you run into. It would be very helpful to us. BTW, I'm typing this from my standalone Guix machine. Eating my own dog food.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#347

Post by nitrogen »

pantalaimon wrote: post #182
nitrogen wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Systemd is too much, but often busybox is not enough. Plus if everything starts conforming to systemd, busybox will have to become like systemd to stay compatible.

I doubt you want to run Gnome on a system where you have to use busybox. Also if busybox is not enough, a minimal systemd system will still be leaner and faster than the equivalent sysV system. http://events.linuxfoundation.org/sites/events/files/slides/...

It's not just GNOME; an embedded device that acts as a USB host needs something like udev, and as I recall reading systemd has swallowed the hardware plugging notification systems, or was working on it. The success of systemd in getting single-user kernel patches that only make sense for desktops and systemd is most concerning, though. Linux is great because of its modularity; previously, if init didn't make sense you could switch to openrc, upstart, or others, without having to change the way you do logging, DHCP, hardware plug events, etc.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#348

Post by wazoox »

pjmlp wrote: post #296
wazoox wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You completely missed the point. It's not about living as in 1978, it's about _not throwing away_ accumulated knowledge. What use is my CP/M knowledge nowadays? None at all. What use is the knowledge I could have of '78 Bourne shell, pipes, signals, vi, ed, awk, grep, man? Not only useful, but still of daily use.

Cars from last century still take me from A to B. It doesn't mean I want to drive one.

New cars have almost exactly the same interface as cars from the 50s or even older ones. People having learned to drive at any time since WWII can drive any brand new car, and nobody proposed seriously that we switch to a joystick or a brain interface.

Similarly, though the underlying hardware and code share basically nothing with Unixen of yore, old knowledge is still useful on modern Linux. This commonality of interface is more important than inner workings.

By the way the most expensive cars by far (therefore arguably the most desirable) are old to very old. A Ferrari 250 GTO is way more valuable than any new car. IIRC the most expensive car ever is a 1929 Bugatti Royale, and even you can drive it.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#349

Post by angersock »

SEJeff wrote: post #326

He rants about systemd, then talks about liking CoreOS, which uses systemd for everything. He is contradicting himself, but I'm genuinely not sure of why.

Read it again:

Author is saying that CoreOS is a good solution because you use it with heavily isolated containers. Thus, any use of systemd is unable to screw up hosted applications. For that use case, it makes sense, whereas in more general use, systemd wants to get all up in everything.

Re: Systemd redux: The end of Linux

#350

Post by nitrogen »

johnny22 wrote: post #151
nitrogen wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think of anything that isn't a web server, file server, database server, or desktop.

jolla uses systemd on their phones and tablets right now. IIRC it's also part of some soon to be shipping vehicle integrations, for in-car entertainment systems and mapping.

That doesn't make systemd right for the other hundreds/thousands of embedded Linux systems. If you recall my response elsewhere in the thread, "Company X uses it" is unconvincing.

Also, it's inevitable that if systemd and software expecting to use it take over more and more aspects of userland and the kernel, vendors will be left with no choice but to use it as well. So "more vendors are switching to systemd" is not a convincing argument either. I like to make my own decisions on the basis of modularity and replaceability (vendor lockin has been a huge burden in other major projects not mentioned in my online persona), not popularity.

Post reply on HN