Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#81

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:35 PM UTC

mindcrime wrote: post #20

KirinDave wrote: post #2

I keep waiting for the reasoned, technical arguments against systemd instead of veiled metaphors, complaints about its creator, or protestations that it's different. The initd-inspired community has resisted the push for declarative and component-based core system infrastructure for so long, and it's causing very strange distortions to the linux ecosystem as solutions get sought for the problems it introduces. System…

I keep waiting for the reasoned, technical arguments against systemd instead of veiled metaphors, complaints about its creator, or protestations that it's different. I think @pmoriarty here just nailed it. It's not necessarily that "SystemD sucks" or that it doesn't do what it proclaims to do. But the fact that it's so monolithic (in practice, if not in principle) and subsumes so much of the rest of the system, and i…

> The "Unix Philosophy" of "do one thing and do it well" isn't just a tagline. That philosophy is cherished because it's been proven to be valuable. Replacing init with something that moves away from that is certainly worthy of questioning, if not outright criticism.

Systemd is a whole group of small, factored tools that call to each other. This complaint gets trotted out a lot and I lump it in with the "It is different because it has new features."

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#82

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:36 PM UTC

rst wrote: post #45

horusthecat wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a holy war, but it does have a lot of politics, which engineers like to pretend don't exist. Here is the only solid criticism of systemd I've read that focuses on design (as opposed to bugs that surface from the sprawling throw-it-over-the-wall approach to development): http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0/ Notably, darknedgy hosted/hosts uselessd, which was a lightweight version of systemd. On…

To some of us, the "sprawling throw-it-over-the-wall approach to development" is the problem. Particularly when they decide to reimplement services instead of using battle-hardened code, and revive old bugs that haven't been seen in the wild in years. As has happened with their DNS resolver, which was initially shipped missing measures that everyone else had shipped years ago to deter cache poisoning, and had buffer…

"Battle-hardened" code is a myth. Please do not appeal to it. Either you're doing the hard work for security or you aren't.

You do not need to experience a breach in advance to have a hope of stopping a breach.

Besides, if people cared about security they'd use tools and languages and runtimes that help them test thst code works right. They don't, by and large.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#83

Post by yebyen » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:39 PM UTC

khedoros1 wrote: post #58

ksk wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you should know better and you do junk work then you will be shit on. >times who are learning or do not claim to be experts That makes no sense. If _Linus_ thinks you should know better is not the same as "they claim to be experts". According to you, who has claimed to be an expert and demanded that Linus should listen to them? >and has a _huge_ ego. Sounds a lot like Linus Torvalds. >I have an ego the size of a…

It seems like Linus tends to be rude to the right people, while Lennart is rude and dismissive of anyone who disagrees with him, regardless of who they are.

I have nothing of substance to add, but I agree with that.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#84

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:40 PM UTC

falsedan wrote: post #77

KirinDave wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you like being inconsistent and tribal, then yes. You can.

> If you like being inconsistent and tribal, then yes. You can. I feel like you're pushing an agenda & have discarded any possibility of listening to other points of view, or modifying your position. I recognise it as 'listening in bad faith'. I didn't say I liked being inconsistent or tribal, you are putting words into my mouth in an attempt to discredit my position as irrational. It's still a false choice: I can ch…

I did read your post. I just disagree with it entirely. You're picking and choosing who gets to be a bad actor based on your moral compass. That's a thing you can do, but I have a different compass. Don't expect appeals on the axis of your internalized morality to be compelling?

You can choose how you spend your time. But that doesn't mean you can choose how people evaluate that time and if it's fair or not. This is a direct consequence of your own point!

This thing where you suggest I listened in "bad faith" but your point is dancing around the definition of "can" seems pretty bad faith to me.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#85

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:41 PM UTC

khedoros1 wrote: post #58

ksk wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you should know better and you do junk work then you will be shit on. >times who are learning or do not claim to be experts That makes no sense. If _Linus_ thinks you should know better is not the same as "they claim to be experts". According to you, who has claimed to be an expert and demanded that Linus should listen to them? >and has a _huge_ ego. Sounds a lot like Linus Torvalds. >I have an ego the size of a…

It seems like Linus tends to be rude to the right people, while Lennart is rude and dismissive of anyone who disagrees with him, regardless of who they are.

This is entirely a matter of opinion and cultural norms. That's a terrible basis for an international project.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#86

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:42 PM UTC

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #44

KirinDave wrote: post #2

I keep waiting for the reasoned, technical arguments against systemd instead of veiled metaphors, complaints about its creator, or protestations that it's different. The initd-inspired community has resisted the push for declarative and component-based core system infrastructure for so long, and it's causing very strange distortions to the linux ecosystem as solutions get sought for the problems it introduces. System…

With Emacs vs Vi it was a way to amuse ourselves, because everyone is free to use their own favourite editor. With Systemd, we are not - we're all forced to use it. Yes, it did solved some SysV init problems, but introduced a few of its own. Most importantly though, it grew into a more complex subsystem with numerous dependencies, and this unfortunately causes problems unheard of in the old days of SysV Init. I don't…

Use a different Linux distribution, then? Most are basically interchangable, outside of real outliers like Qubes.

Your distro maintainers obviously thought it was a worthwhile decision for them to make.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#87

Post by khedoros1 » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:49 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #68

khedoros1 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's my biggest issue with it: tendrils branching out into all the other aspects of the system. Systemd won't always be the state of the art, and we'll want to replace it someday. Replacing SysV init? Relatively easy. Replacing Systemd, all the ancillary programs, desktop environments that it ties into, etc? It's a ton of work. One of the arguments I've heard repeated is that it's all very modular, but that doesn't…

Replacing SysV init is not easy, unless you want to copy the majority of its problems as well.

I didn't say that it was easy, I said that it would be easy relative to the effort necessary to replace Systemd.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#88

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:52 PM UTC

jjnoakes wrote: post #6

KirinDave wrote: post #2

I keep waiting for the reasoned, technical arguments against systemd instead of veiled metaphors, complaints about its creator, or protestations that it's different. The initd-inspired community has resisted the push for declarative and component-based core system infrastructure for so long, and it's causing very strange distortions to the linux ecosystem as solutions get sought for the problems it introduces. System…

I'm a proponent of declarative init systems, and I'm against systemd. I don't think getting into the specifics is going to be productive here, but I just wanted to point out that the debate shouldn't be framed as "systemd" vs "non-declarative init systems".

I am happy to consider other equally capable declarative systems, but they're not common.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#89

Post by KirinDave » Tue, Jul 11, 2017, 11:56 PM UTC

mlinksva wrote: post #24

KirinDave wrote: post #2

I keep waiting for the reasoned, technical arguments against systemd instead of veiled metaphors, complaints about its creator, or protestations that it's different. The initd-inspired community has resisted the push for declarative and component-based core system infrastructure for so long, and it's causing very strange distortions to the linux ecosystem as solutions get sought for the problems it introduces. System…

I've purposefully avoided following the holy war, but somehow recently failed and noticed a new to me argument: systemd replaced lots of functionality wtih a memory safe implementation (shell scripts) with a memory unsafe implementation (C).

Right, but SystemD also got right of shell scripts, which are Turing complete and very difficult to secure when run in ring 0.

But yes, I hate C, too.

Re: Why Did It Take Devuan Two Years to Replace Systemd?

#90

Post by khedoros1 » Wed, Jul 12, 2017, 12:04 AM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #85

khedoros1 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems like Linus tends to be rude to the right people, while Lennart is rude and dismissive of anyone who disagrees with him, regardless of who they are.

This is entirely a matter of opinion and cultural norms. That's a terrible basis for an international project.

We might be better off replacing both dictatorships with an international leadership panel or something. It seems like that would be the quickest way to dilute the effects of opinion and clashes between different cultures.

It might be a quick way to blunt innovation in both. Or not. I dunno; people are complicated.