Without Systemd

Post by chris_wot » Sun, May 10, 2015, 6:09 AM UTC

chris_wot wrote: post #67

vezzy-fnord wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extremely outdated. In the 15 versions since then, systemd has evolved quite tremendously with too many things to list succinctly.

Ok, I'll bite. What does systemd itself link to now?

  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libsystemd-daemon.so.0]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libudev.so.1]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libselinux.so.1]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [librt.so.1]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libwrap.so.0]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libpam.so.0]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libaudit.so.1]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libcap.so.2]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libkmod.so.2]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libdbus-1.so.3]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libpthread.so.0]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [libc.so.6]
  0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED)             Shared library: [ld-linux-x86-64.so.2]

Post by chris_wot » Sun, May 10, 2015, 7:02 AM UTC

mercurial wrote: post #71

chris_wot wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't see why most people would want that, with the exception of replacing journald. Why strip out device init, or even timers? Swap init is less useful, but I don't see the harm. What is it that makes uselessd attractive? And why do you consider systemd to be bloated?

I like my init system to be an init system. However, the scope of systemd seems to expand monthly. I mean, you get an ntp client, a dhcp client, a logging system, and they apparently want to expand into containerized applications? I'd rather have a project with a smaller, well-defined scope.

Post by digi_owl » Sun, May 10, 2015, 8:27 AM UTC

Jach wrote: post #18

blueflow wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar feelings here, this "it kinda works"-feeling was the reason why I switched to Linux in the first place. What are your plans? Where do you go when you 'leave'?

To a distro that doesn't force things down the throats of its users in the same degree Ubuntu et al. do. e.g. Gentoo. (You can even run a FreeBSD kernel in Gentoo if you want.) That isn't to say it's been all rosy in Gentoo-land. It was an effort to keep Gnome3 off my system, to keep the existing Gnome2 versions of everything until MATE (and the Gentoo community packaging) was ready enough to replace Gnome2. But my s…

Post by the_why_of_y » Sun, May 10, 2015, 11:34 AM UTC

nl wrote: post #79

glandium wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can imagine a future world in which package management tools understood containers Solaris has had this with zones since, IIRC, before Oracle bought Sun.

Oh god no! Zones are cool, but package management on Solaris is pretty bad. It has improved since they built something similar to Apt, but AFAIK it doesn't have the deep understanding of Zones that I'm suggesting is desirable.

Post by fapjacks » Mon, May 11, 2015, 7:08 PM UTC

chris_wot wrote: post #43

fapjacks wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Particularly that it doesn't work. I always hear about people for whom It Just Works, but that hasn't been the case for me over the course of a couple handfuls of machines. For what it's worth, LP and his gang seem like people for whom "it mostly works" is satisfactory, and that's not something I'm comfortable with in something like an init system, to be frank, because what about when it doesn't? The answer there unf…

Your implementation doesn't work. My question is what part of the design is flawed?