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

81–90 of 416 posts

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#81

Post by 5G_activated »

bsimpson wrote: post #73
bryanlarsen wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

systemd is not a monolith, and distros make different choices on what portions of systemd they which to ship and enable by default. For example, not all distros ship and use systemd-resolved by default, to choose from your list.

systemd-boot competes with grub

and grub is a rotting pile while systemd-boot is a simple boot entry multiplexer that rides off the kernel's capability of being run as an EFI executable, it just happens to live in systemd's tree. not a good example

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#82

Post by PunchyHamster »

cf100clunk wrote: post #65
preisschild wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That "choice" still has to be maintained. And why spend effort when you can do the same things + more with systemd?

Clearly there are lots of people who don't want something that does what you say systemd does. Bravo that choice is out there, but what a pity that LFS does not seem to have the resources to test future versions for SysVinit.

you can fork it and do it.

But frankly if goal is to learn people about how Linux works, having SysV there is opposite to that goal

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#83

Post by fragmede »

cf100clunk wrote: post #34
molticrystal wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I'll ignore the System D hyperbole, your point about Unix has merit. I think the *BSD are also good, at least from an educational standpoint, with their relative simplicity and low system requirements. Since there is a lot of integration making a from scratch distro might take less material, but it could be supplemented with more in depth/sysadmin exploration.

From an education standpoint for those who really, really want to understand, the *BSD init and SysVinit systems require direct human administration. You break it, you fix it. Then, and only then, does learning systemd's ''then something happens behind the curtain'' type of automation make sense. If the student decides that one is more suitable than the other(s), they've done so from an enlightened vantage point.

I thought systemd was fairly straightforwards, even if it does too many different things for my tastes. What's an example of it doing a too much magic behind the curtain thing?

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#84

Post by Brian_K_White »

procone wrote: post #14
soldoutcold wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am looking forward to UnixFromScratch and Year of Unix on the desktop as Linux more and more sells itself out to the overstuffed software virus that is System D.

I know this is a bit tongue in cheek, but the systemd hate is so old and tiresome at this point. I need my systems to work. Not once in my career have I experienced a showstopping issue with systemd. I cannot say the same for sysV.

I can absolutely say that I've never had a showstopping problem with sysv. That is about 30 years as a unix & linux admin and developer.

The whole point of sysv is the components are too small and too simple to make it possible for "showstoppers". Each component, including init, does so little that there is no room for it to do something wrong that you as the end user at run-time don't have the final power to both diagnose and address. And to do so in a approximately infinite different ways that the original authors never had to try to think up and account for ahead of time.

You have god power to see into the workings, and modify them, 50 years later in some crazy new context that the original authors never imagined. Which is exactly why they did it that way, not by accident nor because it was cave man times and they would invent fancier wheels later.

You're tired of hearing complaints? People still complain because the problem did not go away. I'm tired of still having to live with the fact that all the major distros bought in to this crap and by now a lot of individual packages don't even pretend to support any other option, and my choices are now to eat this crap or go off and live in some totally unsupported hut in the wilderness.

You can just go on suffering the intolerable boring complaints as far as I'm concerned until you grow some consideration for anyone else to earn some for yourself.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#85

Post by wormius »

Wow this is sad. If any distro keeps the old ways around it should be LFS or Slackware I would think. And maybe Gentoo.

I'm honestly worried about the forces pushing systemd in Linux spoiling the BSD ecosystem. And I'm worried that the BSDs do not have enough people to forge alternatives and will have to go along with the systemdification of everything. sigh

*Note, I ended up on Cachy, which is systemd, so I'm not some pure virtue signaler. I'm a dirty hypocrite :P

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#86

Post by fragmede »

chucky_z wrote: post #76
procone wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this is a bit tongue in cheek, but the systemd hate is so old and tiresome at this point. I need my systems to work. Not once in my career have I experienced a showstopping issue with systemd. I cannot say the same for sysV.

I understand where you’re coming from but early systemd with both ubuntu and centos was a fucking mess. It’s good now but goddamn it was painful and the hate is 100% justified.

Funny you should mention CentOS, which it outlived.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#87

Post by ErroneousBosh »

"The second reason for dropping System V is that packages like GNOME and soon KDE's Plasma are building in requirements that require capabilities in systemd that are not in System V."

I remember LFS from way back in the day.

What do we all think the overlap between LFS users and Gnome or KDE users is? I think it's pretty small.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#88

Post by fragmede »

5G_activated wrote: post #81
bsimpson wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

systemd-boot competes with grub

and grub is a rotting pile while systemd-boot is a simple boot entry multiplexer that rides off the kernel's capability of being run as an EFI executable, it just happens to live in systemd's tree. not a good example

It's a pretty good example of why people think systemd is bloated and does too much. It's a simple boot entry multiplexer. Does it need to live in systemd's tree?

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#89

Post by nomel »

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…

5 and 6 sounds like good candidates for a bug reports/PR, if there's not already some "right" way to do it.

Re: Linux From Scratch ends SysVinit support

#90

Post by binkHN »

nine_k wrote: post #78
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…

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 use runit on my production workstation and don't think about it; it just works.
Post reply on HN