What's wrong with systemd?

What's wrong with systemd?
Why are people avoiding it?
Isn't systemd Free Software?

Other urls found in this thread:

adios-hola.org/
kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html
underhanded-c.org/
lwn.net/Articles/576078/
without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

bump. i want to know as well. trisquel 8.0 might introduce systemd, so far i haven't worked with it.

>What's wrong with systemd?
Nothing.
>Why are people avoiding it?
No one is avoiding it.
>Isn't systemd Free Software?
It is.

They don't like it because it's new and it works better than what they had.

I use Gentoo it doesn't use systemd by default so I don't care.

Youre both full of shit. Systemd does nothing for users but force them to use it. It just makes dev life easiee because lol dependencies. Thats literally its only purpose. Fuck off and die for thinking this is ok. If i took your furniture and said yyou can only have ikea cuz i know how to fix that, youd probably change your faggy ass tune.

It's a trap to mold us into accepting the NWO and the one world government. That's why the intelligent people avoid it. Too much power in the hands of so few is never a good thing.

But I like Ikea furniture, so what's the problem there?

Its low end trash. Herman miller or get out.

I use GNU shepherd and it's nice.

It's kinda messy and not quite modularized enough. I don't fully believe in "do one thing and do it well" but I do believe in "have a host of separate components that can basically function somewhat as a non-complete package when you've got the userspace and init covered entirely from boot to login" if you feel me. It just makes navigating different things a bit annoying since a lot of what used to be simple becomes "oh I've gotta symlink xyz over here and write x entry blah blah".

Probably because they use a system that's very non-standard and they have great difficulty getting systemd to work how they want, so it's worth avoiding. I don't use it but I use a distro I like and it happens to not use it, which is only a minor benefit, and sometimes I miss things about systemd.

Yes, it's free software. You'd have to be braindead to call it botnet if you're using a project as large as the Linux kernel.

Great! Another day on Sup Forums. Yet another fucking question about systemd.
You can read can't you? Then look at the all the other threads that have asked the same question. Search online. After that, make up your own mind about systemfuckingd.

But it is botnet and linux kernel is as well. Just use seL4 kernel and you are good to go

prove it, the entire thing is open source and you can compile it from that, show me where you're getting your info

Go to /r/netsec and download vault7 archive. And also bigger codebase = more attack surface so there is that.

>vunrebilities in a software application = botnet/intentionally backdoored
>just download this massive compiled list of various assorted topics, you'll find it somewhere in there I swear XD

Do you actually know what a botnet is?

please explain how software can force me to anything

I would consider a software botnet if it can be infected the moment it connects to internet and leak data to some NSA facility. If you want convenience over security, you might as well use Windows 10.

Again, like I said, it's open source. Point me to the line of code that proves this, since it's all available to you and you say you found this in vault7, you shouldn't have any trouble no? You cannot expect me to believe there are intentional backdoors (read: intentional) left in software without proof.

Also, (bad) botnet software is software that enables a specific network of unsolicited data sharing or malicious activity as an attack on a set of users. An example is the Hola VPN add-on.

adios-hola.org/

Unidentified volunteers can intentionally leave vulnerabilities in the codebase, which might not be identified for the following years and if it gets found somewhere, you will hear something like "C code is shit thats why this vuln exists its not our fault" or some bullsit excuse like that. Lastly, if you are uncapable of using ctrl+f on a bunch of documents, you might not even bother reading them.

just silly little boys desperate for a hill to die on so they choose the most trivial one

...

>still refuses to point out code
You clearly don't actually have proof of this. You're asking me to download a document from some website with very little creditibility (I.E the link could be malware or an edited version of the document) and saying "find it yourself" with absolutely no evidence that it exists and no clues on what to ctrl-f and why it's proof it's an intentional backdoor that makes it a botnet. You're then resorting to an ad hominem by implying that my refusal to do so is proof of inability, which is ridiculous and you know it user.

The rest of your argument is falicious too, "it can be done by unidentified volunteers", never said it couldn't be, I'm saying there's no proof it is. Also, all volunteers must be identified by name when contributing to Linux, no psuedonyms.

kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html

Never said systemd was fine, I'm the 3rd, 4th and 6th reply. If you'd look at my original comment, I pointed out that I do not use it and I do not like the organization of its features. Read, user. Read.

I have no idea what SystemD is because I'm not a Linux user, but I love to watch Linux users fling shit at each other so that I can use it against all Linux users.

Fucks like you used the same argument before Snowden and vault7. If someday somehow the entire CIA database gets leaked, you will say something like " its russians hurr durr ebil putin not my bresident". Even if we get CIA director admit it live on TV, you will use the previous arguments as well followed by a linch attempt on that said CIA director. Know go back to your containment site.

>What's wrong with systemd?
It's a buggy pile of bloated software that has lost the plot. It was about parallelising init PID1 at first, now it's about replacing the linux kernel.
>Why are people avoiding it?
Because it breaks their init scripts, its buggy, can't be audited, likely is backdoored
>Isn't systemd Free Software?
So? I could write malware and give it a free license.

This addresses nothing, user. "Fucks like you", people who agree there is no literal (literal) code peice in the Linux kernel, hidden in plain sight that uploads your data to create a network of malicious bots? I don't live in America, so yes, not my president, my Prime Minister is Bill English of the national party. If the CIA director comes in and says "Yes, I contributed a botnet to the Linux kernel" I would certainly be quite convinced. I'd still like someone to point out the code that does it, but there is probably about 50 million techies, cs students, hobbiests, etc that would love to go through that. Autism is strong, someone will find it.

user, notice how you've gone from stating there is blatant proof existent that code in the Linux kernel is there to set up a botnet between Linux using computers to predicting how I may repsond to future events and telling me to go to a different website? What happened?

>You clearly don't actually have proof of this
Lack of evidence is not proof of absence you fucking shill.

Linux has been audited countless times by many large corporations.

systemd is a rapidly evolving pile of crap that's being pushed out by a single vendor (RedHat) and being forced onto users through committees like Debian (which is run by debian women).

Never said it was. Said you'd be braindead to think there's an intentional backdoor in the Linux kernel present. I don't have proof there isn't, but I think the odds lean so heavily in the favour of there not being one, that it's unbelievable to think there is.

Yes, I agree with all of this.

its removing options from developers and turning linux into windows. sure its slightly convenient now but it'll be a backdoor later, if it isnt already. And what can you do, basically every distro adopted it overnight.

>hurr le open source
like you cant hide shit in C code
underhanded-c.org/

>lets take init scripts and add a http server to it!!!

fuck you redhat shills and fuck pottering

>but I think the odds lean so heavily in the favour of there not being one
Only because it's been audited so many times, it doesn't mean the odds lean heavily, it just means that it's safer to assume it's clean.

systemd on the other hand, does not and can never meet those conditions.

Repeating the same thing over and over again won't advance the argument user. Its not my job to convince you let alone spoon feed you. What you are doing is a logical fallacy, repeteadly using "if, probably, maybe" without providing legimite proof that there is no such backdoor or vulnerability exists in linux kernel to allow such attacks. Remember they found a vulnerability in Linux that existed over ten years. Now tell me, an agency such as NSA or CIA could possibly miss that in the span of ten years. Nice strawman, nice argument user. *claps*

large attack service

lack of true auditing

Daily reminder that systemd is FOSS (Free & Open Source Software) and that it is good software that fulfils the needs of modern devops, sysadmins, regular users and even application developers. Since work on systemd project restarted in 2010 and it's initial inclusion in Fedora Jan 2011 it has gained code contributions from over 700 developers worldwide and became the default init system and session manager in every major GNU/Linux distribution since 2012. Developers from each of these have commit access and have helped to design and shape systemd to fit their needs and unify core system between distributions over the last 5 years.

However as great of an improvement as it has proven to be it has attracted many paid trolls and mentally ill Linux users who spread lies and FUD about it, a large group of these single out developers and attack them with constant trolling, abuse, stalking and even death threats. Many of these 'people' are from the *BSD camps; after Linux usage and contributions sky-rocketed 15 years ago they have been on a constant mission to cause trouble, including making threats of violence and rape against people who create GPL licensed code.

There are also thought to be many of these people on the payroll of Microsoft to try and destroy strong powerful FOSS projects by negative campaigning. Fortunately as usual for Microsoft their FUD and paid shills turn up 4 years too late and don't have technical arguments, making it obvious what they are: paid trolls

"I think your attitude is pretty typical of systemd detractors, and that attitude is exactly why systemd is making a victory sweep across all major Linux distributions;

Since you are in total denial of any existing problems with sysvinit, you are of course unable to suggest any alternative to it, or begin any coherent work on an alternative to it. The denial also suggest a lack of technical insight into the problem, and the pathetic lack of any alternative development work also suggest a lack of technical ability to make such an alternative.

This seemingly leaves systemd detractors with only one option; negative campaigning. So they have wasted years of slandering Lennart Poettering and other open source developers and companies, and whining, ranting and trolling on web forums, but without any real technical argumentation.

Using derogatory terms, like "bloat", or "Windoze crap" aren't technical argumentation, just like copy-pasting unattributed quotes from random sites about "Unix philosophy" doesn't convince anybody serious either.

You are also alienating people who may have been sympathetic to developing alternatives to systemd; who wants to join a bunch of anonymous people who rant like lunatics, and who seems to enjoy smug negative attitudes against other open source developers.

So to sum up; you are just a loud minority who conducts negative campaigning, seemingly without any ability to gather people to construct a positive alternative to systemd. As long as you deny any problems with sysvinit, and deny any positive merits of systemd, you will be unable to analyse the situation and therefore paralysed into inaction. This of course will mean, that Linux distro after Linux distro will switch over to systemd. Enjoy the future with systemd on every Linux distro; your negative attitude made it possible."

Ahaha. Couldn't you find a less obvious strawman? Its ridicilous to witness because somebody probably paid you to write that.

>However as great of an improvement as it has proven to be it has attracted many paid trolls and mentally ill Linux users who spread lies and FUD about it, a large group of these single out developers and attack them with constant trolling, abuse, stalking and even death threats. Many of these 'people' are from the *BSD camps; after Linux usage and contributions sky-rocketed 15 years ago they have been on a constant mission to cause trouble, including making threats of violence and rape against people who create GPL licensed code.

"I remember being severely disillusioned by this in my early days. I read some article that explained how a "spell" program can be written to report the spelling errors in a file. It uses 'tr' to split into words, then "sort" and "uniq" to get a word list, then "comm" to find the differences. "cool" I thought. Then I looked at the actual "spell" program on my university's Unix installation. It used a special 'dcomm' (or something like that) which knew about "dictionary ordering" (Which ignores case - sometimes). Suddenly the whole illusion came shattering down. Lots of separate tools only do 90% of the work. To do really complete work, you need real purpose-built tools. "do one thing and do it well" is good for prototypes, not for final products.
The thing that annoys me most about systemd is that I didn't write it first!"

- Neil Brown
lwn.net/Articles/576078/

"The problem for Gnome and KDE is, that systemd is vastly superior to anything out there, and that it will help them dump loads of hard to maintain code, and give them easy access to make powerful distro-agnostic programs.

systemd provides a common, uniform Linux plumbing system that makes life easier for all user program developers. So of course Gnome and KDE will start to take advantage of systemd, why shouldn't they?

The main problem with those who for some reason or another doesn't like systemd, is that they are incredibly lazy. Instead of actually getting together to make an alternative development stack to systemd, they rant against Poettering and spew empty platitudes about "UNIX philosophy".

The most pathetic example of this anti-systemd laziness, is of course "ConsoleKit". It has now been unmaintained for +1½ years, but it is a crucial piece of infra-structure for any Desktop. But instead of either maintain it or make an alternative, anti-systemd people just rant against Gnome for no longer making it a priority to support this piece of abandonware. All rant and no work.
[...]
Yes, that is true last time you checked, and next KDE edition (KDE SC 5/Plasma 2) will of course also run on *BSD. But with reduced functionality on all non-systemd systems, compared with the systemd version.

This is not because of some sinister conspiracy, but because systemd offers easy use of many nice features that KDE and Gnome (and LXQT etc) would like to use, and non-systemd systems doesn't provide.

The point is exactly, that systemd is a very nice uniform Linux plumbing system, and that DE's are starting to take advantage of that."

"I’m trying really hard not to suggest launchd here (so I won’t). The idea of registering everything up-front with a broker and then letting IPC / timers / HW events start things from there (in cascade fashion) is still the right architecture. Even the linux die-hards have essentially grasped the necessity of systemd (even though they’re going to hate on it for awhile longer)".

- Jordan Hubbard, FreeBSD co-founder

[shilling intensifies]

without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd

"I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and laptop both run it."
- Linus Torvalds, ITWire Interview.

>linus
who?

I wish'd there would be ONE thread about systemd with intelligent discussion, without fanboys suggesting each others to kill themselves.

The systemd haters would probably move to BSD if they were smart enough to use it, instead we have to deal with this vocal minority of bitches/whiners.

There is literally nothing wrong with systemd. Systemd is Free Software, so you have all freedoms you need, which makes systemd good software.

>b-but I'm forced to use it
No you aren't. There are enough alternatives. Blame your distribution for switching to it, not the program.

Daily reminder that there's literally no valid argument against system.

>t. autists shitting the bed because systemd took away their scripts
HAHAHAHA you fucking retards. You can still do everything you want to with the right settings.

You can hate on systemd all you like, Linux isn't just for you, there are serious businesses that need its functionality. Your parent's basement doesn't need to apply.

Samefagging this hard

I can't believe how quickly the systemd shills found the thread. Pottering must have a script watching Sup Forums.

inb4 this post repeated many times in this thread
Hello Redhat! ;)

You microshills need to get some new material.

>shilling
>free software
brain damaged?

>microshills
>implying you aren't Lennart
Hey Lennart, I like how you think we work for pajeetsoft. Nice attempt at reverse psychology.

>Le anyone who is against the shitstain known as systemD is a microsoft shill
You need to go back.

>>Le

>hurrr you have to be selling something to shill something
>no hidden motive
>RedHat now achieved centralized control over linux userspace
kys

Linux is a kernel, retard.

Why are you using Linux? Guess who developes most code of it? Red Hat.

fedora is forcing me to use linux, what do?
can we make an end to this?

As the systemd shill suggested, lets abondon linux on a wide scale and start mass contributing to bsd code instead. Red Hat can infiltrate whatever it wants. We will fork, as much as its necessary.

install openbsd

>Linux userspace doesn't exist
systemd shills, everyone.

>Guess who developes most code of it? Red Hat.
Yeah, RedHat would like people to think that. Sure, they provide the most number of patches, but the hardwork has always been done by the Linux foundation which they do not (yet) control.

I'm actually doing this. I've become a FreeBSD contributor and the only Linux machines I'm keeping around are firewalled embedded systems with very old versions running Slackware.

RedHat can keep Linux. Fuck you Pottering.

please explain how it does nothing and yet forces people to use it.

An init system shouldn't be a dependency of a desktop environment *cough* GNOME *cough*.
This single fact explains all the hate, and why Debian, Arch, etc. switched to it.

Apart from the fact that GNOME and even KDE now make use of logind and not systemd, there are logind replacements which allow use on, for example BSD and there is consolekit which works as long as the complainers steupp up and maintain the code ;)

Also logind was not depended on for years after Arch switched to it and may have not even existed, it was written because it was seen as useful and it proved so useful that the DE authors have made it the de-facto supported with of session management.

These are simple, basic facts of reality and it seems your employer Microsoft has not informed you well enough to actually be convincing.

>thee hardwork has always been done by the Linux foundation
but that's wrong you fucing retard
linux himself wrote like 2% of the kernel, all he currently does is accepting patches written by the community

>;)
Hi Lennart

>no one is avoiding it
>the biggest linux distro is forked to a version that's only difference is not having it
ok

The most important parts are handled by Linus and crew. RedHat only patches enterprise shit these days anyway. Google shoves a whole lot of crap from ARM. Doesn't mean either of these are the core parts.

t. kernel mailing list member

...

Go easy on him, he's a systemd enthusiast.

It's being developed and maintained by an SJW company "Red Hat" who has proven to have ties to the US government, specifically the NSA and CIA. These little bitches have been trying to undermine and reshape the linux community for too long. Need I say more? Avoid, just avoid.

...

I'd like to reverse the question. If systemd is shit, why there is no universal and good init system that is picked up by most distros?

you missed "accepting" should be "accept"

GNU/Linux*

>FreeBSD init

>universal
Is it present on most systems? Is it universally approved so much that it makes FreeBSD init a de facto standard?

>can't be audited
It's written under the GPL user...

>Suggesting the use of the old, unstable ConsoleKit API that even Gentoo devs say is deprecated.
>Suggesting to use GNOME without systemd on Gentoo using the hackjob Funtoo Patchset
Also logind is an optional dependency for KDE, so it has integration but isn't needed at all. It's even an optional dependency for Cinnamon, a fork of GNOME.
Lennart plz, I'm not blaming you man, it's really the GNOME devs fault. But don't defend them.

You reatrded fucks. You imbeciles.

If the NSA or the CIA wanted to infect the GNU operating system, they wouldn't really need to create a new init daemon (and they wouldn't have the skills to, anyway), they would just infect X11 (or any program) and call it a day.

X11 is a huge pile of pure shit, literally just patches upon other patches, that is both unsuitable for modern computers and very insecure since it has networking capabilities and ANY program can read and control keyboard/mouse input.

If you really care about security, stop arguing retarded arguments and go contribute to Wayland or Mir.

>implying anyone here can code something more complex than 'sudo pacman -syu'

Furthermore, the UNIX philosophy is also unsuited for modern development. Modularity can take you only so far, and by that I mean X11 and PulseAudio.

>Furthermore, the UNIX philosophy is also unsuited for modern development
You have clearly never developed software for a major company. Projects that are not modular are also not easily maintainable and generally get replaced when the subject matter experts move on to other projects.

thanks CIA Nog

Openrc

It's ludicrously complex and has fundamental design issues (parking everything on PID 1 is fucking retarded).

It doesn't help that the developers feel like the world owes them everything for making the shitshow and make all sorts of retarded mistakes and decisions. The whole NTP dealio, multiple privilege escalation bugs, not following a least-permissions model, bugs allowing any shell user to hang a system, etc.

It can't do basic shit that software it's replacing can do.

Windows registry > Emacs > systemd

Just another meme that Sup Forums doesn't understand but grabbed onto because it's another thing to shitpost about.

>arse linux
No wonder there, how are those untested broken packages treating you?

security risk
does too many things for no good reason
binary logs

otherwise it's a really nice init system

sysvinit :^)

It's an init trying to do everything at once. If all it did was its init job, nobody would care.

>Tfw literally proud of being stupid

It's broken in Debian/ubuntu too.

Nothin wrong, just unneeded in my system.

50/50