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

Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

naftuli.wtf

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 272 posts

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#31

Post by ioddly »

agumonkey wrote: post #20

Systemd ideas I'm all for but it only hints at linux lack of clean abstraction power. sysvinit was full of redundancy; apparently BSD found a way to make a thin abstraction layer to make init files clean. Bash isn't "good" at hinting proper abstractions, I rarely see talks about this, maybe gurus can see through the rain. I keep seeing a place for a tiny lambda friendly intermediate layer .. Just so you can compose p…

I recall seeing something like that, which included a Scheme dialect, but I can't for the life of me remember what it was called.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#32

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

quickben wrote: post #25
xenadu02 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said the unit philosophy was the be-all, end-all? Unix doesn't even believe it's own philosophy because it's too damn painful. Why does ls do sorting? Why does grep do -R recursive searching? How is that "Do one thing and do it well"? Unix is just a collection of random decisions made by various people over the years. The Unix philosophy is really more like "I've always done it that way so don't you dare change i…

"The C compilation model of separate header files is not a good design" This is probably just your lack of experience not having worked on 50+ million LOC compiling for 12 hours and not having anything else as a better option. There is a reason these things exist.

Do you want to clarify that, because I think you may have missed a "not" in there.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#33

Post by skissane »

quickben wrote: post #25
xenadu02 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who said the unit philosophy was the be-all, end-all? Unix doesn't even believe it's own philosophy because it's too damn painful. Why does ls do sorting? Why does grep do -R recursive searching? How is that "Do one thing and do it well"? Unix is just a collection of random decisions made by various people over the years. The Unix philosophy is really more like "I've always done it that way so don't you dare change i…

"The C compilation model of separate header files is not a good design" This is probably just your lack of experience not having worked on 50+ million LOC compiling for 12 hours and not having anything else as a better option. There is a reason these things exist.

Isn't the limitations of the header file system the reason why the C++ module system is being developed?

Why wouldn't something like the C++ module system be of benefit in C also?

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#34

Post by chungy »

colemickens wrote: post #17

Why would you run the Exec command through systemd-escape? The help text says that's for the NAME of the unit... Am I missing something? Also, I'm failing to think of a scripting purpose that requires you to place non-trivial bash directly in a systemd unit that couldn't be solved by writing out the script somewhere and just invoking the script in the unit.

> Am I missing something?

You're not. Contrived example is contrived.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#36

Post by ausjke »

ashark wrote: post #24
FeepingCreature wrote: post #14

I'd probably respect SystemD a lot more if it measured itself against a modern init system like Gentoo's OpenRC instead of pretending it's invented dependency handling. https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Comparison_of_init_systems > OpenRC provides a number of features touted as innovative by recent init systems like systemd ...

OpenRC's the only init system I've actually liked . It's one of the things I really miss from when I used Gentoo, and I don't know why more distros didn't adopt it years ago.

probably it is not related to technical, SystemD has Redhat in the back initially I think.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#38

Post by felixgallo »

jcrites wrote: post #8
aaronky wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hated systemd when I had to start using it. It tries to do way too much. The antithesis of the the Unix philosophy. Journalctl grew on me though.

I think systemd needs to do most of the things it does. Russ Allbery's analysis of systemd [1], written as part of Debian's evaluation of whether to switch to systemd, explains the benefits. Journal integration is something that Russ was also skeptical about, until he realized its value: * Integrated daemon status. This one caught me by surprise, since the systemd journal was functionality that I expected to dislike.…

> PrivateTmp=yes > PrivateUsers=yes > PrivateNetwork=yes >The fact that systemd supports these configuration options means that there's a simple and standard way to employ them with any service.

What exactly does 'PrivateUsers' do? What uid do I have? When I write that uidin a db, what value does it keep? Between invocations, does the uid change or is it per unit? If a file is owned by a private uid, what do other processes on the system see? Is PrivateUsers for this unit file only, for the unit files in this group of unit files, across the entire system, across the entire cluster? If I want two different programs to share this PrivateUsers concept, how do I do that?

It turns out that gluing random shit to the side of a monolith gives you the illusion of convenience, but since the monolith will not do that thing well -- for example, identity management -- you will end up with some programs that adopt the half-assed solution, and some programs that are forced to do things a different way because their use case is complex. Now you have two problems.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#39

Post by problems »

kalenx wrote: post #3
Esau wrote: post #2

I don't care for SystemD for the same reasons that I don't like MacOS's init system: it an opaque, confusing mess.

As are most Bash init files with InitV... At some point we should consider that the init system as a whole (including the configuration scripts for each daemon) _is_ complicated and often confusing. In this regard, writing something like SystemD to elegantly handle most of the usecases is actually a good idea.

What about runit?

Unlike all of the above, runit isn't complicated. You write a tiny, often one-line script and it executes, if it exits, it waits a reasonable amount of time and restarts it.

Not only is it not complicated, but it runs beautifully on top of an existing init system. So now wherever I go I have one tiny script that will start my python based web services and similar. I run the same basic script on freebsd rc, ubuntu upstart and arch systemd boxes.

Re: Systemd Sucks, Long Live Systemd

#40

Post by ausjke »

The sad thing is, you do not really have a second option, yes I know some distros say they have alternatives, but SystemD becomes the "preferred" init system nearly everywhere now.

I just hope Debian to get rid of SystemD and return to whatever else. I know I'm biased, just failed to find a reason to love SystemD, tried a few times.

Post reply on HN