Why do we hate systemd again?

Why do we hate systemd again?

Other urls found in this thread:

man.openbsd.org/ath
0x0.st/mVk.txt
0x0.st/c7a.servic
0x0.st/mVn.txt
0x0.st/mVd.servic
lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/2/415
lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/2/629
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Too mainstream

anime isn't real kiddo

I know.

Doesn't follow the Unix philosophy of, "do one thing and do it well".

Linux isn't UNIX anyways

I don't know. I just want to look cool.

>An operating system should just do one thing

2% DESKTOP MARKET SHARE

Linux isn't unix though

Wrong board retard

Makes it too easy to use Linux.

Why do you want to weight down Linux to a server/CLI OS so much?

Do you fear success and hence want your OS to be a continuing failure?

I want Linux to succeed so I can use my professional software on it one day.

poorly designed aids

i've given up on linux ever putting the brakes on adding yet more mountains of insane garbage anyway

What profession are you on?

gaming

I use the Adobe suite, user. Do not try to sell me on free software knock offs of its products. They are all failures.

CAD

He uses both CAD and Adobe suite

Something tells me your real profession is

because lennart poettering made it

because literally everything has a dependency on it now

because it solves no actual problem

because you can't opt out

because you can't criticise it

because this is the future you chose

>dhcp in init system
>http server in init system
>git in init system
>binary logger in init system
It's only a matter of time before the bloated heap of shit makes a Windows registry knockoff to replace /etc.

Isn't there any way to manipulate compile flags so those are not loaded?

>you can't opt out
It's Linux. If you're not happy, just make your own distro or contribute to Devuan.

Hate because people said so.

I'm okay with binary logger.
Solve the issue of missing erro log before syslog get started.

>petsounds.jpg

>we

>dhcp in init system
Sane option. Maybe good for minimal/diskless boot

>http server in init system
>git in init system
This is crazy but I don't see it enabled on my Debian.

>binary logger in init system
Not bad. Just keep the log in RAM for desktop.
Server guy should use persistent to disk syslog.

Also, it should have option to replace cron.
I don't need cron when systemd can do the same thing.

There is a whole wiki dedicated to explaining that, just google it

Aww, this damn thread again..?

Systemd is against the linux philosophy of "doing one thing well". It turns Linux (slowly but inevitably) into a monolithic system. If you read "the cathedral and the bazaar" you'll know what I mean, systemd is turning the bazaar into a cathedral..
This may not sound like much, but it's a important step. What will be the next step? A unified GUI in 5 years? Why not just buying Win then?

Furthermore it will be hard to replace in the future. Even guys who think systemd is a good thing will admit it has flaws. It will be pretty much impossible to write a completely differnt programm for startup in the future, with systemd being so ingrained.

Next problem is that systemd creates a single point of failure, it's a high value target. Once ou have a backdoor in systemd your whole system is compromised. This is even more of an issue since almost every linux uses systemd.

Also the devellopers are not very nice people. They insulted many guys, they didn't care about any criticism, they just did it "their way" and gave no flying fuck about what the community thinks.

Last but not least:
You can't avoid it. Linux was always meant as alternative, as system where you can choose your distro or even your components. Systemd killed that freedom* (*= with free as in "free to chose if you want to use a programm or not").

trips confirm

Systemd will become one of exploit target, but the same can be said with glibc or kernel.

As for replacement, it'll harder on desktop as many DE have some sort of dependencies.
Not a problem on headless setup though.

different people fucker

>systemd will kill Linux and everyone will move to the superior OpenBSD
I can't wait for my wifi cards to work.

>Also the devellopers are not very nice people

So how did they get everyone on board if they hurt everyone's feelings?

I don't. It's fast and useful.

Poorly designed? The script hackery used to start Linux before was certainly poorly designed.

Systemd has yet to fail me, and it has no particularly huge quirks.

> because you can't opt out
You can actually simply not use it as your init.

Go wild, run OpenRC or whatever. I find it inferior, but workable... and the best init of those that came along before systemd.

They provided a good piece of software that solved many distro maintainer's / sysadmins various problems related to init and the other things it does.

That's how. Most distro maintainers care a lot about getting improvements and solutions to problems and not about who made them.

Linus Torvalds isn't the nicest guy either. Still, he does an excellent job at managing / administrating the making of his kernel. It's not actually just doing one thing well, but many things well. Same thing.

>Free operating system
>expecting it to have a market share

You can't in 90%+ of distros because all packages are compiled to require systemd directly or via a dependency. Not to mention that even when you CAN get rid of systemd, another 90% of the time, your shit's broken beyond usability if you do.

it's not like anyone on this board can even understand what an init system is supposed to do

the people on this board that like systemd like it because it makes it easier for them to get their special snowflake OS usable

The people that dislike it are doing so for contrarian reasons

There's barely anyone here that can support an argument with actual facts based on systemd's architecture of role in a GNU/Linux system

Even if there is they're just going to get meemed out

Yes, everyone had the problem, that's why nobody so much as even hinted at it, let alone mentioned it, until systemd appeared. OK kid.

It actually dominates most markets apart from muh end user personal computing.

Said end user personal computing is then still dominated by the derivative called Android, also a free operating system.

You have to get very specifically into "desktop" personal computing before you find an example of a non-free OS having more market share, but it's almost an artificial distinction and the respective market is in decline...

>if you ignore every single anti-systemd post, systemd wins!

if you're not tailoring your hardware to Linux you should just go back to using Windows

Linux is not meant to go on your Walmart laptop
It's not even usable as a desktop OS

Have you tried not being clinically retarded?

Of course you can. You just recompile and replace everything until it works. That's literally how the distro managers do it, too, and has been the case for many distro's choices before.

Honestly, systemd isn't the first thing, you also wouldn't have been able to get rid of BASH or ncurses or kernel version x or newer other such things that easily.

But if it's too much effort for you, go with the other 10% or less of distros that you're hinting at. That's just how you get an easy ride.

Of course people have hinted at inits sucking - you can find that it on like every bug tracker ever, and that's not the only way.

Nobody forced the adoption of systemd, it is just easier and more useful for maintainers.

Just about all the projects that integrated it somehow had and wanted to invest some effort into getting systemd support, and they did it anyways 'cause they wanted it. Plain and simple.

>Linux should work on my shitware without configuring anything

Delusional Wintard cancer that has become rooted in the Linux development community

This is why Linux is heading towards a dependency nightmare with a corporate arm controlling critical code

All because some special snowflake wants a ready to go Windows clone with a terminal to use the web framework flavor of the month

“We” don't.

>>>/tumblr/

>systemd on Gentoo
real sort of cancer going on here

The only "special snowflakes" here are the ones that want to keep on going with this whole slipshod, thrown together, "it's not bug it's a feature" style of system design that Linux has been using for a while now.

OpenRC is a gigantic piece of shit and you know it

I also do that. I had been using OpenRC and the predecessor Gentoo baselayout init for like a decade, but systemd was easy to switch to and superior, so I use that now.

>to keep on going with this whole slipshod, thrown together, "it's not bug it's a feature" style of system design that Linux has been using for a while now
like the sphaghetti code dependency nightmare that is systemd? It's disgusting, I know

Don't bother, this thread is purely composed of shills trying to out-poottering each other.

>nce ou have a backdoor in systemd your whole system is compromised

Uh yeah it's PID 1. This is the nature of PID 1 not just systemd.

It's weird systemd is the one program I've seen where the common criticisms are all that it's too good.

1. Systemd has become a dependency for so many programs.

So what they're saying is a shit ton of other software has found systemd useful.

2. Systemd does too many things.

Notice that they don't say it does a really shitty job at too many things. It's literally complaining about this software is too functional.

3. All of the distros use it.

So multiple groups of people indepently decided it was the best solution available.

What's next? Systemd feeds the poor? Systemd fills the world with rainbows and unicorns? Systemd stumped Trump? Systemd upgraded my RAM?

I'm not really deep enough in to systemd to decide if it is good or not. I pretty much just use it to decide what starts when I boot and mount encrypted disks on boot. However I don't find myself reading arguments that inform me on the good and bad of systemd, which is why I read this stuff. I find myself in the bizarre position of reading people complaining about how useful a program is.

> shills of Poettering
Muh bullshit holy unex doctrine was violated. Nobody could want to do that and it's all a conspiracy.

SystemD is making Linux into RedhatBSD

And that's a good thing,

I think the offense most people take to systemd is that the systemd “project” is a collection of a lot of programs (like udev, logind, journald, timesyncd, etc.), which is apparently a bad thing.

Most of these people do not realize that they are all distinct components which are merely maintained by the same people - but you can replace and swap them out as you wish. For example, I personally run crond instead of using systemd timers - and I use ntpd instead of systemd-timesyncd.

Many criticisms seem to be centered on the idea that all of this stuff (like the infamous QR code thing) is being stuffed into PID 1, which is quite frankly not true - that's a part of journald which nobody is forcing you to use. (Just disable journald and enable syslog-ng or whatever)

Because there is openRC

My sides!

>An operating system should just do one thing
Thinking that systemd is the whole operating system is precisely the mistake that it itself is doing.

i thought most stuff except broadcom (obviously) worked

seems like intel hardware is generally common and well supported

>script hackery
Is something a hack just because it's a shell script? If not, please point out how the venerable SysV init system is a hack.

>You can't in 90%+ of distros because all packages are compiled to require systemd directly or via a dependency.
Just use a good distro, then. It's perfectly possible in Debian.

There's better init systems for me. If you like Systemd then nobody gives a shit but I hate it and I used it for close to six years. Systemd is more than just an init system. It's bad form to have all of your software depend on something that's been known to have compatibility issues. The Systemd philosophy offers performance > security, which is why it's not supported by hardened-sources. I want my init system to be just that, an init system. I don't want all of my software to depend on it unless I choose to. Having everything a child of pid 1 is fucking retarded. Systemd devs are garbage.

>>dhcp in init system
>Sane option.
There is literally zero reason to do it in the init system itself. It would be "sane" if the init system controlled the DHCP client, not incorporated it.

I had 2 Atheros chips that didn't work when I did fw_update.

ah, well im sorry to hear that then
man.openbsd.org/ath
watch this space i guess

>sounds
>image mimetype

>OpenRC
Please tell me how this: 0x0.st/mVk.txt
Is better than this: 0x0.st/c7a.servic

They didn't get everyone on board. Debian's technical committee was almost completely torn apart over systemd. I'm actually not sure how that drama turned out in the end.

It's too late, I already have Gentoo installed and configured.

>SystemD pops up out of nowhere
>is slowly adopted by distro after distro without much fanfare

Hmm I wonder who is behind this?

Or how this: 0x0.st/mVn.txt
Is better than this: 0x0.st/mVd.servic

>So what they're saying is a shit ton of other software has found systemd useful.
The point is they never needed a dependency on SysV init.
>Notice that they don't say it does a really shitty job at too many things. It's literally complaining about this software is too functional.
Not true at all. The binary logging shit, for example, has been the center of much controversy as it has proven to be more easily corrupted and more difficult to access in sane ways. More importantly, doing tons of stuff in one place instead of in nicely separated programs makes it more difficult to control and reason about its behavior in various situations.

>So multiple groups of people indepently decided it was the best solution available.
And it has always been quite controversial. Mostly, the desktop fags have run over the people who just want a good, stable Unix-like system, not least for servers.

>Nobody could want to do that and it's all a conspiracy.
Pretty much.

shorter != better

>implying the only difference between those files is length
If you genuinely prefer your gigantic shell scripts full of hacky logic, work-arounds, copy/pasted boilerplate, redundancies and other brittle nonsense, be my guest.

The OpenVPN init script is one of the reasons I switch to systemd. It's so much more elegant under systemd: I simply have a common generator that I can instantiate to different configurations. (Under OpenRC I have to hack-around it by creating a bunch of symlinks and then checking the script name in the init script)

Also, systemd actually allows me to restart OpenVPN when it gets disconnected - which OpenRC can't do at all. (In fact, OpenRC can't even tell if the service is running or not. systemd is a billion times more robust because it will actually track the PID and detect when something crashes instead of just pretending that “I started it” === “It's running“)

By having more room for flexibility, since they can do arbitrary stuff, whereas the systemd configuration relies on systemd itself having knowledge of everything that may or may not need to be done to start a program.

Also, 0x0.st/mVk.txt simply does a lot more things, and is portable to many other systems.

For fuck's sake when will you freetard NEETs understand that GNU/Linux will not get good software unless it's used as a desktop OS by a lot of people?

What are you talking about? It has tons of great software. Other than gaymes, I don't see what Windows has going for it that is so great.

It already has everything I want. I don't need more shitty windows-like 'features'.

post legs

Good software, like the type Microsoft Windows has?

No thanks.

>The point is they never needed a dependency on SysV init.
No the point is that you don't have to add a dependency to your software unless you use that dependency. I suspect there are configure flags that can be used to turn off that dependency since it is completely possible to run Linux without Systemd. My computer is filled with tons of software that doesn't depend on systemd and I use a Red Hat distro.

>The binary logging shit
> nicely separated programs

So the user before was bullshitting about being able to change your logging program? Every time I've used journalctl the output has been text. It seems like setting up a program that pipes it to a text file every so often would be trivial even if it weren't possible to do what that user has already said you can do. I've even seen it claimed that you can configure systemd logging to use text anyway.

Frankly if your logs are important to you, you should be backing them up. If they're critical you should be backing them up on a separate system.

>And it has always been quite controversial.

And yet for every major distro it has happened. After all the controversy about systemd is too functional and is too useful it happened. After all the complaints about the desktop bogey man all the crying and the .1% of our user base is going to leave and run the same distro without systemd(which negates the dependency/muh monolithic argument) it was still adopted.

what if you can't use journalctl for whatever reason

because it's not the unix way, which is kinda ironic considering the majority of Sup Forums probably doesn't know or care anything about unix other than it's the idea linux is bassed off of

This. What if you've just had a partial filesystem failure and journalctl/libc/whatever is unavailable, and this makes you unable to continue debugging the problem? With text log files, the logfile itself is the only point of failure.

What like the j button on your keyboard broke?

>I suspect there are configure flags that can be used to turn off that dependency
I'm sure, but as long as they used a sane init system, they didn't need a dependency on that init system at all.

So you have a file that's critical to debugging a system and you're keeping your only copy of it on the system that's guaranteed to be broke when you need it for debuging. The user is always an additional point of failure it seems.

what if it literally just happened

i would never hire you as a sysadmin and i hope to god you don't write software

How is it a bad thing to not require fetching backups or requiring multiple machines for debugging? Even if one does that, there will certainly be situations where it's inconvenient or unavailable at the moment.

>Linus Torvalds isn't the nicest guy either.
At least he has a good record to not break other people's code and then responding to bug tickets like "no, you should fix your code".

The prime example for this is the "debug" cmdline argument debacle (the one that made Linus refuse to merge code from systemd). Just in case you missed it:
lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/2/415

Linux (kernel) development has always been "if we break userspace, it's a regression".

>systemd breaks tmux
>they try to make tmux do stuff for them
who the fuck would ever want systemd

>write shitty code
>get told to fix it
>get triggered like a tumblrina instead of fixing it

Why?

Not really, busybox have everything under the hood, including init and dhcp client. Oh, also shell.

I'd just like to interject for moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, systemd/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, systemd plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning systemd system made useful by the systemd corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the systemd system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of systemd which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the systemd system, developed by the systemd Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the systemd operating system: the whole system is basically systemd with Linux added, or systemd/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of systemd/Linux!

because
# systemctl start sshd.service
is longer to type than
# service sshd start

The Adobe Suite you autistic shit stains.

Just because you don't have a job doesn't mean professional tools are useless to everybody.

"service" works with both.

I didn't follow the systemd-side of this, but the kernel "bug" got fixed in Linux just in case the systemd devs didn't:
lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/2/629