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

Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

techrepublic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 191 posts

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#91

Post by eythian »

doiwin wrote: post #90

Everything I know about systemd is bad. When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup. Or that there is one main script that calls all scripts that are intended to be startet on startup. I do not want to write a "service" that has some "only run once and then discard" flag or whatever. When I want to lo…

That's just saying "I want things to be the way I first learnt them and don't want them to change."

This is fine, but you do have to accept that things are going to move on without you.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#92

Post by doiwin »

eythian wrote: post #91
doiwin wrote: post #90

Everything I know about systemd is bad. When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup. Or that there is one main script that calls all scripts that are intended to be startet on startup. I do not want to write a "service" that has some "only run once and then discard" flag or whatever. When I want to lo…

That's just saying "I want things to be the way I first learnt them and don't want them to change." This is fine, but you do have to accept that things are going to move on without you.

By that logic, no mistakes can ever be criticized.

I explained, why systemd is a step in the wrong direction in mutiple ways. That has nothing to do with habbits.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#93

Post by Znafon »

doiwin wrote: post #90

Everything I know about systemd is bad. When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup. Or that there is one main script that calls all scripts that are intended to be startet on startup. I do not want to write a "service" that has some "only run once and then discard" flag or whatever. When I want to lo…

> When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup

This is not very specific, have you never had any race-condition with this? There is a reason SystemD ask some informations regarding the service that needs to be launched. I don't see how ignoring those makes a good argument against SystemD.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#94

Post by StreamBright »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #54
pdkl95 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> does ONE thing and does it well: it manages the system "managing the system" is not "ONE [problem]". A big part of the problem with systemd is this presupposition that management of something as large and complex as a modern OS is a single monolithic[1] problem. > it's complex because it does a complex work. See, you agree that it's a complex problem! It's so complex with so many different use cases it isn't even p…

You still have s6, openRC etc. as choices, but it's funny that nobody of the anti-systemd folk was willing to pick up the work needed to maintain consolekit, yet when logind came around, had lots of strong things to say. How about picking up the work as well? And none of the alternatives seem to really get away from the bash script paradigm & more towards the declarative side of things, which doesn't feel like much b…

I think that you are missing the point. I was quite happy without systemd. What work has to be picked up really? You are trying to make it sound we could not live without systemd and we must replace the systems. If you want to write a better init system, go for it. Many people tried and succeeded none of them became the standard for linux (partially because there are no standards in linux).

https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5877/what-are-the-p...

As I said in other comments, if you want to replace inis scripts with systemd format service descriptors I will support your efforts becuase using shell script is broken. If you in the making of replacing init with something better also replace logging, ntp, dns, dhcp and a bunch of more then I will say no. This is exactly what systemd does. Rewriting rock solid, CPU efficient code with something shaky and CPU intensive. No thanks.

>>> And none of the alternatives seem to really get away from the bash script paradigm.

Factually incorrect. There are many init alternatives that got away from the shell script paradigm. Including SMF in Solaris. https://www.thegeekdiary.com/a-beginners-guide-to-service-ma...

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#95

Post by eythian »

hyperman1 wrote: post #10
znpy wrote: post #3

I see a lot of hate about systems and I used to loathe it too. Then I took a course on systemd specifically and it opened my eyes, and now I'm quite fond about it. Systemd actually does ONE thing and does it well: it manages the system. It's the missing layer between kernel space and user space. It has quirks and bugs like all software, but I think it works very well, all things considered. To those who say that it's…

I think you are missing the point: Something like systemd has a good reason to exist. But the devil is in the creating team. We've seen pulseaudio, a good system in theory, but an untrustworthy unstable system in practice. And if it wont work, it is so complicated and non-transparent that you need a specialist. Taking a step backward from Alsa is hard, and they managed to do it. Now that same team is messing with sys…

Pulse has been fine for ... I dunno, a decade or so now. I remember when it was problematic, and then one day I discovered I could do things like send sound to other computers, control different applications independently, turn on bluetooth headphones and just have them work. All the sort of things you'd expect a modern sound system (which ALSA certainly is not) to be able to do without having to edit configs or whatever.

Pulseaudio is definitely better at what it does than ALSA, it is not a step backwards.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#96

Post by doiwin »

Znafon wrote: post #93
doiwin wrote: post #90

Everything I know about systemd is bad. When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup. Or that there is one main script that calls all scripts that are intended to be startet on startup. I do not want to write a "service" that has some "only run once and then discard" flag or whatever. When I want to lo…

> When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup This is not very specific, have you never had any race-condition with this? There is a reason SystemD ask some informations regarding the service that needs to be launched. I don't see how ignoring those makes a good argument against SystemD.

No, I can not remember having a race condition regarding startup scripts.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#97

Post by eythian »

ddalex wrote: post #58
jrugk wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The trend to get rid of systemd and its metastasis into most of Linux is excellent news. I don't know where you're seeing this trend, really. For all major distros, it's been the opposite thus far.

However it's slowing changing. Knoppix has always been seen as a trend setter, and it still has a large influence where it matters - open source maintainers that are not corporate-driven (i.e. Debian).

Knoppix hasn't been seen as a trendsetter in an extremely long time that I know of. I remember it being a big deal before live CDs became a thing that everyone did, but that's about it.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#98

Post by labawi »

Znafon wrote: post #93
doiwin wrote: post #90

Everything I know about systemd is bad. When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup. Or that there is one main script that calls all scripts that are intended to be startet on startup. I do not want to write a "service" that has some "only run once and then discard" flag or whatever. When I want to lo…

> When I want to write a script that runs on startup, I expect that I can just put (or link) it in some directory where the scripts are that get started on startup This is not very specific, have you never had any race-condition with this? There is a reason SystemD ask some informations regarding the service that needs to be launched. I don't see how ignoring those makes a good argument against SystemD.

Many simple systems don't do parallel service startup like systemd, if that is what you mean.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#99

Post by tony »

Has anyone here used knoppix (or any other dedicated Live CD) recently?

In the early 2000's, distros didn't have live environments bundled. All debian used to have was a TUI installer and that's it. Ubuntu 4.10+ introduced a live sessions.

From 2004-now driver support and hardware detection has gotten much better. There are live session CD's that include "nonfree" drivers that further improve hardware support. You can pop in most popular distros and easily connect to WiFi and mount drives, often just as easily as knoppix did.

This complaint about systemd isn't a user-related, but the perspective of the live cd creator. Maybe it's true systemd doesn't help that case, but would systemd get in the way of a live cd user though? They're likely not going to be adding/removing/starting/stopping services, setting up users/groups, or anything else that'd be done in a permanent environment.

Re: Knoppix 8.6 abandons systemd

#100

Post by crb »

znpy wrote: post #3

I see a lot of hate about systems and I used to loathe it too. Then I took a course on systemd specifically and it opened my eyes, and now I'm quite fond about it. Systemd actually does ONE thing and does it well: it manages the system. It's the missing layer between kernel space and user space. It has quirks and bugs like all software, but I think it works very well, all things considered. To those who say that it's…

Can you link to the course you did?
Post reply on HN