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

Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

linuxiac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 23 posts

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#11

Post by User23 »

SahAssar wrote: post #9
User23 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popular with people who don’t care is pretty faint praise. But it’s probably enough to run a business so there it is.

It's also popular with quite a few people who actually really like it and use it extensively, like me. We just tend not to be as vocal about it, probably because we don't need to be since that side is the default in all mainstream distros. My main complaint about systemd is that most people don't use it enough. the units for sockets, timers, paths can be really powerful, and the sandboxing capabilities are great. The…

It wasn’t meant as a negative. As you clearly imply, people have built a trillion dollar company on it. You don’t have to care about the implementation details is basically Apple’s value proposition. E.g. I just want my airpods to work with all my stuff is a great user story.

And that’s not meant as a positive.

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#13

Post by dmitriid »

xplanephil wrote: post #10

The guy who ignores all established standards (do one thing well) in order to reinvent a square wheel, now works for the company, that, wait a minute, has been well known for ignoring all established standards (IE box model anyone?). Yup, he's going to do just fine!

> ignoring all established standards (IE box model anyone?)

Funny you should mention that.

IE box model was correct from the practical point of view, and the standard was wrong. Today every single CSS reset forces IE box model with box-sizing: border-box;

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#14

Post by hbogert »

xplanephil wrote: post #10

The guy who ignores all established standards (do one thing well) in order to reinvent a square wheel, now works for the company, that, wait a minute, has been well known for ignoring all established standards (IE box model anyone?). Yup, he's going to do just fine!

Which thing did he make that doesn't do one thing well? Is this the hate on the systemd repo which houses multiple applications?

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#15

Post by hdjjhhvvhga »

SahAssar wrote: post #5

> The general perception is that no one wants it (systemd) I disagree. A few loud voices strongly do not want it, but a few others like it, and the vast majority seems pretty content using it, not caring as long as it works well enough.

"No one wants it" is obviously a hyperbole. "It caused significant problems," "several design decisions were unfortunate," "a significant percentage of sysadmins were upset by it," and so on - all these are true statements, whereas "no one wants it" is not.

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#16

Post by hdjjhhvvhga »

xplanephil wrote: post #10

The guy who ignores all established standards (do one thing well) in order to reinvent a square wheel, now works for the company, that, wait a minute, has been well known for ignoring all established standards (IE box model anyone?). Yup, he's going to do just fine!

> IE box model anyone

There used to be a (long) time where everybody ignored web standards, and each browser had their own extensions. But you are right: it was Microsoft who tried to introduce complete vendor lock-in with ActiveX controls - I couldn't use my private banking without it, for example. And it wasn't that long time ago.

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#17

Post by cassianoleal »

User23 wrote: post #7
SahAssar wrote: post #5

> The general perception is that no one wants it (systemd) I disagree. A few loud voices strongly do not want it, but a few others like it, and the vast majority seems pretty content using it, not caring as long as it works well enough.

Popular with people who don’t care is pretty faint praise. But it’s probably enough to run a business so there it is.

I like systemd's service units and its subsystem, and related units like sockets. I dislike pretty much everything else about it.

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#18

Post by cassianoleal »

SahAssar wrote: post #9
User23 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popular with people who don’t care is pretty faint praise. But it’s probably enough to run a business so there it is.

It's also popular with quite a few people who actually really like it and use it extensively, like me. We just tend not to be as vocal about it, probably because we don't need to be since that side is the default in all mainstream distros. My main complaint about systemd is that most people don't use it enough. the units for sockets, timers, paths can be really powerful, and the sandboxing capabilities are great. The…

> the sandboxing capabilities are great

I find the sandboxing to be very subpar. It works for the most basic use-cases but for anything with slightly more complicated requirements you're better off scripting your way through cgroups and namespaces.

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#19

Post by SahAssar »

cassianoleal wrote: post #17
User23 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Popular with people who don’t care is pretty faint praise. But it’s probably enough to run a business so there it is.

I like systemd's service units and its subsystem, and related units like sockets. I dislike pretty much everything else about it.

What "else" are you referring to? networkd? resolved? journald? Something else?

Re: Systemd Creator Lands at Microsoft

#20

Post by SahAssar »

cassianoleal wrote: post #18
SahAssar wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also popular with quite a few people who actually really like it and use it extensively, like me. We just tend not to be as vocal about it, probably because we don't need to be since that side is the default in all mainstream distros. My main complaint about systemd is that most people don't use it enough. the units for sockets, timers, paths can be really powerful, and the sandboxing capabilities are great. The…

> the sandboxing capabilities are great I find the sandboxing to be very subpar. It works for the most basic use-cases but for anything with slightly more complicated requirements you're better off scripting your way through cgroups and namespaces.

Out of interest, got examples of those use-cases where it does not work?
Post reply on HN