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

Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

lists.linuxfromscratch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 416 posts

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#251

Post by ahartmetz »

pjmlp wrote: post #177
nine_k wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Runit is 5474 SLOCs. Most source files are shorter than 100 lines. Works like a charm. Implements an init system; does not replace DNS, syslog, inetd, or anything else. Systemd, by construction, is a set of Unix-replacing daemons. An ideal embedded system setup is kernel, systemd, and the containers it runs (even without podman). This makes sense, especially given the Red Hat's line of business, but it has little rel…

I love how people worship UNIX design in Linux circles, especially when complaining about decisions where Linux is catching up with commercial UNIXes, as in the init systems replacements. UNIX design was so great that its authors did two other operating systems trying to make UNIX done right. One of the few times I agree with Rob Pike, > We really are using a 1970s era operating system well past its sell-by date. We…

I think the main problem of Unix today is that it's not Unix-style enough. Too many namespaces with too many non-composable separate APIs on them instead of "everything is a file". Plan9 is more Unix than Unix and that's indeed better. Redox OS, too.

The Unix security model is mostly useless today, but it seems like something better is possible as an incremental change, and there are projects that do that, like RSBAC.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#252

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

cf100clunk wrote: post #2

This is a mindblower. To quote Bruce Dubbs: ''As a personal note, I do not like this decision. To me LFS is about learning how a system works. Understanding the boot process is a big part of that. systemd is about 1678 "C" files plus many data files. System V is "22" C files plus about 50 short bash scripts and data files. Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider impor…

> To me LFS is about learning how a system works.

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, Linux plus systemd, or as I've recently taken to calling it, Linux/systemd.

Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning systemd system made useful by the systemd corelibs, systemd daemons, and vital systemd components comprising a full OS as defined by Poettering.

-- https://mastodon.social/@fribbledom/116002799114521341

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#253

Post by tmtvl »

jeroenhd wrote: post #216
bsimpson wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

systemd-boot competes with grub

Outside of Arch(-derived) enthusiast circles, I haven't seen systemd-boot used anywhere. It has some really nice tools and features that Grub lacks (i.e. it has tooling for checking the state of things like secure boot and analysing the security risks of your boot configuration), but every mainstream Linux OS I've used still relies on tools like Grub to boot. I have some gripes with systemd-boot's limitations (notabl…

OpenSUSE uses systemd-boot for its GRUB2 BLS implementation (https://news.opensuse.org/2024/10/08/grub2-bls/>). It's really awesome because it lets me boot from Btrfs snapshots on a fully LUKS2 argon2id encrypted system.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#254

Post by sylware »

I ended linux from scratch support a long time ago. Well I did the right thing. Everything is systemd free on my side, for my own sake. This systemd is so much a "microsoft grade bad idea".

There is still interesting code patches here and there, and interesting info on brain damaged SDKs (gcc, glibc, etc).

Most of the time I remove the SDK itself, basically I write a linear and brutal shell script with fine grained control on the compiler/linker. I do push down to nearly remove completely the compiler driver (a spectacular failure) namely CPP->C->ASM->O.

I would like to move away from ELF too for a modern file format for dynamic libs and executable, but the "geniuses" using complex computer languages (mostly c++) for critical open source components make that a massive pain (runtime, ELF relocation requiring obsolete infrastructure, etc).

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#255

Post by cbmuser »

cf100clunk wrote: post #2

This is a mindblower. To quote Bruce Dubbs: ''As a personal note, I do not like this decision. To me LFS is about learning how a system works. Understanding the boot process is a big part of that. systemd is about 1678 "C" files plus many data files. System V is "22" C files plus about 50 short bash scripts and data files. Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider impor…

SysVInit is abusing runlevel scripts for starting daemons which has always been a hack to be able to resolve dependencies between daemons.

Learning Linux or Unix from scratch shouldn’t include using crude hacks.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#256

Post by cbmuser »

cbolton wrote: post #237
jeroenhd wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mind the inevitable death of System V. It's an archaic relic of the Linux era. Going systemd-only is not necessarily a good choice (though I do understand it from a practical point of view). There are other, better alternatives for System V that are smaller and more modular so you still get the Unix "feel" without the absurd complexity of interlinked shell scripts that System V relies on. I'd like to see Open…

I think systemd is the one to learn now if you want to learn Linux. Maybe someone can make a Unix from Scratch for people more interested in the Unix philosophy than Linux per se.

SysVInit on Linux isn’t true Unix though as the way it abuses runlevels to start daemons was never intended by the original designers of init.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#257

Post by nineteen999 »

It's funny I did an LFS system of my own a couple of years ago which I coined "Head Rat" Linux.

I used the SVR4 packaging system from heirloom-pkgtools (using this of a Claude port of V4 unix to x86_64 as well at the moment) for fun, and compiled up CDE on top of this to boot. I wanted to see what Linux would look like if you dressed it up as much like SVR4 as possible. I liked the result actually. It was kind of like what Sun might have done if they dumped their own kernel and switched to Linux instead.

Originally it used SysVinit, and I started working getting systemd to work with it (because after several years I've come to appreciate it) - but that's the point I stopped working on Headrat - I realised if I wasn't adding SVR4 stuff and was removing it instead, it wouldn't be SVR4 enough.

I don't know how I feel about it - after all I could do an LFS straight out of my head these days without referring to the LFS docs - but I do feel there is something lost when as a Linux community, we try to shove the baggage under the rug and pretend that things like SysV init didn't play a massive part in Linux's rise throughout the 90's and 00's.

History is important, even if we don't like the code today and have more capable tools. But I guess SysV init is deader than dead at this point.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#258

Post by well_ackshually »

cyberax wrote: post #79
razighter777 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What practical problems do you run into with systemd? All the compliants I see tend to be philisophical criticism of systemd being "not unixy" or "monolithic". But there's a reason it's being adopted: it does it's job well. It's a pleasure being able to manage timers, socket activations, sandboxing, and resource slices, all of which suck to configure on script based init systems. People complain in website comment se…

Ohh... I have sooooo many issues with systemd. The core systemd is fine, and the ideas behind it are sound. But it lacks any consistency. It's not a cohesive project with a vision, it's a collection of tools without any overarching idea. This is reflected in its documentation, it's an OK reference manual, but go on and try to build a full picture of system startup. To give you concrete examples: 1. Systemd has mount…

[dead]

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#259

Post by [deleted] »

charcircuit wrote: post #170
cf100clunk wrote: post #2

This is a mindblower. To quote Bruce Dubbs: ''As a personal note, I do not like this decision. To me LFS is about learning how a system works. Understanding the boot process is a big part of that. systemd is about 1678 "C" files plus many data files. System V is "22" C files plus about 50 short bash scripts and data files. Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider impor…

Linux is literally 62k C files. The amount of time you'll spend understanding how Linux works will dwarf systemd. At least when studying systemd you will be learning a more modern approach of init systems.

[deleted]

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#260

Post by varjag »

charcircuit wrote: post #170
cf100clunk wrote: post #2

This is a mindblower. To quote Bruce Dubbs: ''As a personal note, I do not like this decision. To me LFS is about learning how a system works. Understanding the boot process is a big part of that. systemd is about 1678 "C" files plus many data files. System V is "22" C files plus about 50 short bash scripts and data files. Yes, systemd provides a lot of capabilities, but we will be losing some things I consider impor…

Linux is literally 62k C files. The amount of time you'll spend understanding how Linux works will dwarf systemd. At least when studying systemd you will be learning a more modern approach of init systems.

Most of those files are device/fs/network drivers and various arch support. The core you need to comprehend is not that much larger than systemd.
Post reply on HN