• Count Regal Inkwell@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    175
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Having sniffed around the Linux community for years, I feel like whatever flaws SystemD has as a computer program are of tertiary importance when faced with the thing that really matters:

    • The developer of SystemD was mildly rude to some community members that one time. That means he is two hitlers and a stalin wearing a trenchcoat and everything he makes must be utter garbage.
    • loutr@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      83
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah they seem to think he “took over” the Linux init process all by himself. Like distro maintainers aren’t the ones who made the decision to move to systemd based on technical merits (presumably).

      • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        It is on technical merits as you don’t see maintainers complaining about systemd, only users who just don’t like it for number of randomly picked reasons.

    • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      I interacted with him briefly in a forum but didn’t realize who he was until later. He had that a bit of that programmer awkwardness going, but also having such a vocal abd sustained backlash against a major project you’ve been working on for years has to affect the poor dude pretty heavily.

  • ZephrC@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    127
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s a giant mess of interconnected programs that could theoretically still be disentangled, but in practice never are. It was very quickly and exclusively adopted by pretty much every major distro in a short period of time, functionally killing off any alternatives despite a lot of people objecting. Also, its creator was already pretty divisive even before systemd, and the way systemd was adopted kinda turned that into a creepy hate cult targeted at him.

    There’s nothing actually wrong with systemd. I personally wish there was still more support for the alternatives though. Systemd does way more than I need it to, and I just enjoy having a computer that only does what I want.

    • MeanEYE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      ·
      1 year ago

      Am not sure about “giant mess” but indeed it has a lot of moving parts. All that said, systemd is solving tangible problems which is why you will almost never see maintainers complain about it. It’s mostly Linux users which by definition oppose any change, Firefox 4 → Firefox 5, Gnome2 → Gnome3, SysV → systemd

      • ZephrC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        ·
        1 year ago

        “Giant mess” was maybe an uncharitable phrase to use, but it really is a lot of programs that are always used together because trying to mix and match it with other stuff or even just take pieces out is a massive pain in the rear. Again, I don’t actually object to systemd. I use it myself because it’s so much better supported. It is not always ideal for everything though, and I’m a little sad about the lack of support for other options.

        The idea that Linux users by definition oppose any change is just silly though. We almost all got here by making a big change in how we use computers. Almost any change will be opposed by at least some members of any group. That’s just how people are. That’s not a special thing about Linux users. Sometimes a change that is overall for the better causes some things to be lost, and saying the people who are unhappy with that “by definition oppose any change” is kinda creepy, if I’m being honest. In particular all of those examples you gave are times people were forced into a change that was not all for the better, especially in the short term, with little notice, and no opportunity to voice their concerns in a more constructive manner. Of course some people complained. It would be weird if they didn’t.

      • abbotsbury@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        this is a Just World fallacy, assuming the best thing will always be adopted and therefore everything not adopted is worse than [current thing], when it is entirely possible that there are in fact better options

        • Jimbob0i0@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          But in this case, there were extensive technical talks over multiple distributions.

          Debian is probably the best example of how the options were pitted against each other with systemd then winning on its merits.

        • willis936@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is not a Just World fallacy because I’m not talking about justice or people getting what they deserve. My assumption is that OS developers are competent. Until I see otherwise I’ll maintain that assumption.

      • ZephrC@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I didn’t say there were better options. I didn’t say it shouldn’t have been adopted. I said it has some drawbacks, wasn’t rolled out very well, and I miss having other options even if they aren’t as generally useful for everyone, and it is inevitable that some people would complain because of that. That isn’t a problem. It’s okay to complain sometimes. We all do it.

  • CakeLancelot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    102
    ·
    1 year ago

    Does too much for one tool (against unix philosophy) and has poor interop with other tools (binary logfiles).

    • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      89
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not really true. systemd is split up into many different, independent binaries, and each of those does one job and does it well.

    • ichbinjasokreativ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      44
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not really true. systemd is split up into many different, independent binaries, and each of those does one job and does it well.

      • CakeLancelot@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        61
        ·
        1 year ago

        Does it really matter if you can’t use those independent binaries with any other init system? If you want to use systemd, you pretty much have to take the whole ecosystem.

        • caseyweederman@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Your link describes setting up one file, the getty@.service.
          The .target unit files are built-in, and not part of configuration.

    • emhl@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Btw. The Linux kernel does more than one thing. But monolithic kernels are much better for small student projects that won’t be relevant anymore, when Gnu Hurd comes out

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Monolithic kernels are also generally more performant, compared to micro-kernels, it turns out. A bit counter-intuitive at first but, makes sense when you think about it.

        Micro-kernels in general-purpose OSes suffer from a death of a thousand cuts due to context switching. Something that would be a single callback to the kernel in a monolith turns into a mess of calls bouncing between kernel and user space. When using something like an RTOS where hardware is not likely intended for general-purpose computing, this is not an issue but, when you start adding all of the complexity of user-installable applications that need storage, graphics, inputs, etc, the number of calls gets huge.

    • thelastknowngod@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Does too much for one tool (against unix philosophy)

      This tired, old argument needs to die already.

      Do you use browser extensions? That breaks unix philosophy too.

      • Mike@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        You just compared a browser extension and an init system that takes proc id 1. The unix philosophy is about what runs as processes at the system level.

        • thelastknowngod@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          The unix philosophy is about what runs as processes at the system level.

          I don’t know what you mean by “system level” (cat is userspace) but I don’t believe there is any clarification about what kind of applications should apply to the unix philosophy or not. It doesn’t say that applications “should do one thing and do it well only if it is a system process or terminal based program built for purely shell environments.”

          Also, if the argument was exclusively about OS processes, dbus should be in the firing line of everyone in the anti-systemd camp too. That never gets the same level of hate.

          The unix philosophy is old and, while nice to have, is insufficient to fully address the needs of the modern world. It’s not as simple today as it was in the 1960s and 70s and we need to embrace change to progress.

          • Mike@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m honestly not sure what you’re talking about here. The unix philosophy is something informal that applies to compiled utilities that run usually in a bin/ directory. The philosophy isn’t attempting to apply to all software that exists and certainly doesn’t intend to apply to browsers or browser extensions.

          • uis@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Dbus does only one thing: relays messages.

            as it was in the 1960s and 70s

            You will be surprised, but Turing machine was created during WW2, and we still say turing-complete today.

      • Mike@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        You just compared a browser extension and an init system that takes proc id 1. The unix philosophy is about what runs as processes at the system level.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Adblock does only one thing: blocks ads. Doesn’t sound phylosophy-breaking.

  • gayhitler420@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    94
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    If you really want the short version:

    Systemd was half baked literally when it came out and figuratively as an idea, so much so that there’s already a replacement for it in the works.

    A longer version:

    Systemd replaced the init script style of boot and process management, which had been in place for decades. init scripts were so simple they could be understood just by looking at the name: the computer is Initialized by Scripts. Systemd was much more complex and allowed many more tools to interact with the different parts of the computer, but people had to learn these tools. Previously all a person had to understand to deal with the computer was how to edit a text file and what various commands and programs did. After systemd a person has to understand how to use the dozens of invocations of systemctl and it’s variants and if they are dealing with a problem, —you know, the only reason a person would ever be dealing with initializing services— they gotta know what’s going on with the text files that systemd uses to run different commands and programs.

    So a person who already understood what was going on might rightly say “hey, this systemd thing is just the same shit with different file locations and more to learn”.

    People complain about the creator and maintainer of systemd, lennart poettering . Poettering is also the person behind pulseaudio, an powerful but complex audio management daemon in Linux whose name you only recognize because it’s caused you no end of trouble. Pulseaudio was also replaced relatively quickly by pipewire.

    The argument could be made (and probably has) that poetterings work is indicative of the problems with foss developers working as employees of major companies with their job responsibilities inclusive of their foss projects. The developer in that situation has an incentive to make big sweeping changes, they’re being paid for it after all, instead of being more careful and measured.

    When every big foss maintainer is trying to find a way to justify being paid for it, their projects are never done.

    At least poettering is working for Microsoft, ruining windows now…

    E: oh my god I forgot about the binary log files! So before (and now), the universal format for log files was plain text. You know, because it’s a log that’s text. Systemd uses binary log files that need a special tool to open and parse. So if you want to look through them on a computer without that tool you’re kinda screwed. Now systemd isn’t the only software package with binary log files, but many people have made the very persuasive argument that it’s not a trait to copy.

    E2: actually spelled the man’s name right. Thanks @floofloof@lemmy.ca !

    • Chobbes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pulseaudio was also replaced relatively quickly by pipewire.

      I really wouldn’t say that… PulseAudio has been around since like 2004, and PipeWire’s initial release was in 2017 (13 years later). I don’t think PulseAudio was incorporated into most distros by default until like 2007 or so, but that’s still 10 years before PipeWire was even released. PipeWire is only recently becoming the default in popular distros. We’ve had to deal with Pulse for a long time.

      • gayhitler420@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s horrifying. I was just writing from memory and resisting pulse for a few years after it was sort of the defacto standard.

      • Sinthesis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh man you reminded me of bad init scripts that would prevent you from getting to multi-user login. I hope you remembered your root password so you can get into single user mode!

    • motsu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep, to add on as well as summarized this… Linux has historically had a design methodology of “everything is a file”. If your not familear with the implications of this, it means your command line tools just kind of work with most things, and everything is easy to find.

      For instance, there’s no “registry / regedit” on Linux… There’s just a folder with a config file that the application stores settings in. There’s no control panel application to modify your network settings… Just a text file on your OS. Your system logs and startup tasks were also (you guessed it) sinole filea on the system. Sure there might be GUI apps to make these things easier for users, but under the hood it reads and writes a file.

      This idea goes further than you might assume. Your hard drive is a file on the file system (a special file called a block device). You can do something like “mount /dev/sda1 /home/myuser/some_folder” to “attach” the drive to a folder on the system, but that special block device (dev/sda1 in this case) can be read and written to byte by byte if you want with low level tools like dd.

      Even an audio card output can show as a file in dev (this is less the case now with pipewire and pulse), but you used to be able to just echo a raw audio file (like a wav file) and redirect the output to your audio device “file” and it would play out your speaker.

      Systemd flipped this all around, and now instead of just changing files, you have to use applications to specify changes to your system. Want to stop something from starting? Well, it used to be that you just move it out of the init directory, but now you have to know to “systemctl disable something.service”, or to view logs " journalctl -idk something.service" I dont even remember the flags for specifying a service, so I have to look it up, where it used to just be looking at a file (and maybe use grep to search for something specific)

      • ammonium@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        Want to stop something from starting? Well, it used to be that you just move it out of the init directory, but now you have to know to “systemctl disable something.service”,

        That is still the case, nothing stops you from manually moving a file and its dependencies into or out of /etc/systemd/system/

      • Sysosmaster@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Systemd flipped this all around, and now instead of just changing files, you have to use applications to specify changes to your system. Want to stop something from starting? Well, it used to be that you just move it out of the init directory, but now you have to know to “systemctl disable something.service”, or to view logs " journalctl -idk something.service" I dont even remember the flags for specifying a service, so I have to look it up, where it used to just be looking at a file (and maybe use grep to search for something specific)

        not true, SystemD still uses files for this very reason…

        and what is the last time you used the text version of a syslog.8.xz file?

        you are basically complaining that you need to learn how your system works… before you can use it. and there is nothing preventing you from making your own distro that doesn’t uses SystemD, or using rSyslog instead of systemd-journal for logging.

        incidentally, to just view the logs its journalctl -xef (see https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man1/journalctl.1.html for what that means) it will be like the syslog you know.

        want to see the status of a daemon : systemctl status want it for the system systemctl status want to see the logs of only a specific daemon journalctl -xefu . this all, means that its easier to find the logs for diffrent services since there not scattered somewhere in the /var/log dir… (is it in the syslog, does it have its own log file, is it in the kernel log)…

        You are free to setup your system in whatever way you like… but whining about that something works differently is “Microsoft mentality”… lets leave that with them.

      • caseyweederman@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Systemd flipped this all around, and now instead of just changing files, you have to use applications to specify changes to your system. Want to stop something from starting? Well, it used to be that you just move it out of the init directory…

        Enable and disable just create symlinks of the “just changing files” files in your example. It tells you this every time you install something that enables a service.
        Want to do it manually? ln -s (or rm the link to “disable” it).
        Want it to happen later in the init sequence? Put the link in a different .target directory.
        All “systemctl enable” does is put the symlink in the target directory that’s specified in the Install section of the unit file.

        As for “specifying a service”… Everything is a unit file (yes, file), journalctl -u just means “only show me logs for this unit”.
        There’s no flag for “specifying a service”, you just type in the service name. If there’s any ambiguity (eg. unit.service and unit.socket), you type the service name followed by .service
        A flag you might find useful is -g, which means “grep for this string”. You can combine this with -u to narrow it down.

      • HuntressHimbo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not the really the point of your post but I personally tend to use journalctl -fu something.service. That brings you to the end of the logs for that unit and I get to smile about flipping off systemd.

      • Jimbob0i0@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        Except it is clearly written by someone who just despises it, and doesn’t really know what they are talking about.

        Init scripts were awful… they varied by distro and frequently were the source of odd problems.

        There’s a good reason the Linux industry moved away from them to other ways to handle initialisation of the system and service management.

        • elscallr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          They weren’t that bad. You had to look in like 3 places, depending on the distro, but you could find them. And you could see exactly what they were doing once you found them.

          systemd gets a job done but I’d much prefer something simpler.

    • Count Regal Inkwell@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      pulseaudio, an powerful but complex audio management daemon in Linux whose name you only recognize because it’s caused you no end of trouble. Pulseaudio was also replaced relatively quickly by pipewire.

      PulseAudio never gave me trouble but I guess I’m just lucky or some shit. Also PipeWire took forever to come out.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        In games after I press button to shoot, animation plays and then eternity later comes shooting sound when animation ends. JACK compared to PA is super responsive in games, direct ALSA reduces lag by additional 15ms.

    • ammonium@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      init scripts were so simple they could be understood just by looking at the name: the computer is Initialized by Scripts. Systemd was much more complex and allowed many more tools to interact with the different parts of the computer, but people had to learn these tools. Previously all a person had to understand to deal with the computer was how to edit a text file and what various commands and programs did.

      It’s complex because it solves a complex problem. before people had to hack that together with complex init scripts, now they can let systemd do the hard work.

      A comment from an Arch Linux’ init script maintainer: https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/4lzxs3/comment/d3rhxlc/

    • Sysosmaster@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pulseaudio was also replaced relatively quickly by pipewire. lets check that, shall we:

      PipeWire: Initial release 20 June 2017; 6 years ago source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PipeWire

      PulseAudio: Initial release 17 July 2004; 19 years ago source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PulseAudio

      so “relatively quickly” is a time span of 13 years in your idea… or the difference between 2004 and 2017.

      if that’s your level of detail… your whole “rant” is worthless…

      But lets be generous and look into it,

      init scripts were so simple they could be understood just by looking at the name

      this is blatantly false, for the old system you need to know about runlevels, what they mean, how the half backed init annotations work, and its dependency check works.

      ### BEGIN INIT INFO
      # Provides:          myrec
      # Required-Start:    $all
      # Required-Stop:
      # Default-Start:     2 3 4 5
      # Default-Stop:
      # Short-Description: your description here
      ### END INIT INFO
      

      you needed special tools to watch if an application actually was running and not crashed, and to keep it running.

      add to that that the difference between systemd.service file and a sysv / init / initd script is more or less the same complexity (just different standards).

      the universal format for log files was plain text false, the universal format for logging was plain text…

      which is currently (slowly) getting replaced with structured logging. (which is objectively better, imho). there are a number of different log formats, most use a binary (compressed) format. logging to plain text was generally only used for the most recent log entries. a binary format for logging, as long as there’s is tooling to get it to a (structured) textual output, is better than a pure text log. I mean, if its good enough for MySQL / MariaDB it ought to be good enough for you…

    • doktorseven@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      The log files only have binary markers within the text. You could run the raw log files through strings and get the plain log files with everything important intact.

    • uis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pottering is also the person behind pulseaudio, an powerful but complex audio management daemon in Linux whose name you only recognize because it’s caused you no end of trouble. Pulseaudio was also replaced relatively quickly by pipewire.

      Powerful? No, JACK is more powerful and was created 2 years before pulseaudio.

      For context back then OSS was primary audio api, and unlike ALSA it did not have software mixing. So sound servers were created. Lots of sound servers, so it was and still it yet another sound server without extra functionality. Meanwhile dmix existed since at least 2001 and JACK allowed route output of one application to input of another.

      At least pottering is working for Microsoft, ruining windows now…

      You know what? I wich him luck.

    • gornius@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Simple fails when complex problem arrives. Declarative approach of systemd daemons allows for more versatile solutions in unified format.

        • i_simp_4_tedcruz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          To ask a different question… what was wrong with initd? I’m the better part of a decade stale at this point but I don’t know that I ever ran into an edge case that initd couldn’t handle with a little massaging

          • gayhitler420@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            When systemd first showed up there wasn’t much parallelized init systems. People managing complex systems with many services may find the tools of systemd make their lives easier. Of course, nowadays all that complex multi service machine stuff is containerized and none of those containers run systemd 🤔

            If I were gonna psychologize it, poettering and kay typify what the Linux user of the 0s felt when they actually looked at what windows of the time had going on under the hood. “Look at you, tla username, pathetic creature of twenty text files under a trench coat!”

            The problem with that sentiment is that there’s an honesty to recognizing and accepting that you’re not too far removed from the z80 and it keeps you from believing all this computer stuff is more than it’s cracked up to be.

            No one who’s happy with python also keeps a loaded gun next to the server for when it acts up and that’s the problem.

    • thelastknowngod@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah I agree. It was rolled out pretty early in its development maturity so it undoubtedly left a bad taste in some people’s mouths. Overall it’s a net positive though. I don’t want to go back to the old way.

  • seaQueue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    ·
    1 year ago

    I find it incredibly useful - instead of needing to learn a million quirks about the init of every distro they all use the same predictable system now, you learn it’s quirks once and those skills transfer everywhere. Hopping from Ubuntu to Debian to Arch to Fedora is trivial now compared to the old days.

    That and systemd-boot and systemd-nspawn are awesome.

    • redcalcium@lemmy.institute
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hopping from Ubuntu to Debian to Arch to Fedora is trivial now compared to the old days.

      Another take of this is we’re losing diversity which might have some consequences in the future.

      • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Linux has also overshadowed BSD. Diversity matters, but so do standards. Code interaction contracts (think APIs and syscalls) are the glue to make a program that will run on a lot of diffrent software/hardware stacks (like diffrent OSes and hardware combinations). Sadly specific implementation diffrences make the genaric contracts (like UNIX/POSIX) unable to be implemented pefectly.

  • Perroboc@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    1 year ago

    I LOVE systemd, flatpaks, appimages, wayland, and pipewire. The desktop environment feel way more managed!

    Sure, wayland is not complete yet (HDR), flatpak is missing some things (some portals), but the whole ecosystem is way more mature than before.

    This is from someone who used init.d scripts, apt-get and dpkg, x.org, and alsa/pulseaudio/gstreamer.

  • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    ya see, when i ssh into a server and i run some commands, sometimes i mess up, see, and i wanna reboot to get the system back to a known state, right

    and even if the system is in an unknown or invalid state, right,

    i don’t wanna wait half a bloody hour for systemd to get tired of waiting for 1m30s countdowns and actually bounce the damn machine, if it bounces at all

    and i can’t just hold the power button, see, because i’m 2000 miles away from the bloody box

    (I did not make that number up, by the way. I once has a hard drive get hot removed while it was mounted, couldn’t umount it so I had to reboot, and it confused systemd so bad it took 27 minutes to shut down)

    EDIT: aw come on, are you really gonna downvote without leaving a reply?

    • Sysosmaster@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      how is this any diffrent from SysV scripts hanging and preventing a reboot that way…

      you are blaming SystemD for an issue not part of SystemD, but a generic computing issue…

      and yes, you can still just hard reboot your system with SystemD as @elscallr@lemmy.world has point out…

    • elscallr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Raising Skinny Elephants Is Utterly Boring.

      It can be done remotely, even over SSH by writing to /proc/sysrq-trigger

    • whats_all_this_then@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I was wondering why my fedora install took ages to shutdown sometimes and the little googling I did got me nothing. Do i hate systemd now?

      • orangeboats@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Do I hate systemd now?

        No, because that’s not specific to systemd.

        I can quite clearly remember the long shutdown times back when Ubuntu was still using Upstart.

        Generally speaking, long shutdown times are an indication of a system issue (e.g. HDD going bad or slow network) or just scripts being written poorly, and could be worked around by changing the timeout value. Systemd defaults to 90 seconds, but you can change that to 30 secs or lower.

      • rivalary@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Heads up that you can hit [escape] key while booting or shutting down in order to see the console and tell what the computer is actually doing.

  • onlinepersona@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The arguments against systemd come from the same people that love IRC, mailinglists, tiling window managers, split keyboards, don’t have a mouse, debug with printf, main arch or gentoo, unironically write RTFM|LMGTFY, call users “lusers”, play DnD, think Startrek and/or Star Wars cannot be topped, identify with the portrayed super hackers in media, and are proud of doing things the hard way just to feel some kind of superiority in their life.

    Edit: for those who don’t get it, I’m obviously not being serious. If you fit this mythical, stereotypical person… uh… good job?

    • psmgx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      hey don’t go bundling up us Arch users with Tiling window managers with superhackers. I can hardly spell DNS

    • IthronMorn@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just because I ran arch with ratpoison and firefox with Vim keybindings because I didn’t have a mouse wasn’t out of superiority, twas cause I was too poor to afford a mouse at the time.

        • IthronMorn@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Acktuchlly, I had moved just moved to Colorado and ended up living in a family friend’s shed for a couple months. Every few days i walked to the library for wifi to download shit and check email. My TouchPad went out on my acer aspire 1 so if I remember correctly I borrowed a friend’s mouse to get it all setup and afterwards used only keyboard, but out of necessity. Eventually I did get a mouse, and I just use xfce now, but I seriously can’t use a web browser without vim bindings now.

    • brakenium@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Why are you attacking so many loud majorities at once? Not everyone that likes some of those hates systemd or belittles users for

    • superfes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well, I like IRC, ergonomic keyboards, sometimes debug using print commands, use Gentoo (Happy birthday!), play DnD and sometimes have to do things the hard way, and I like systemd, especially as a developer, I can test services right from my user account.

      I think the hate comes from people who just want something to hate.

      • uis@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I meh IRC(no history without bouncers), rarely debug using printf, mostly debug in some GUI, but sometimes in GDB TUI, use Gentoo(HB, Larry the Cow), don’t even know DnD rules, don’t use systemd and really hate pulseaudio.

    • dm_me_your_feet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This description literally fits everyone in my team at work and i love it. I m the least nerdy one there and its beautiful.

    • Magister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      It mostly fits me, except the split keyboard and “super hacker”. I started with un*x in the 80s and looks more like a 50s yo bearded guy 😂

    • IsoKiero@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Above all else, it was kinda forced on us. Most of us were comfortable with sysv already.

      And at least for me it solved a problem which didn’t exist. Sure, there’s some advantages, but when it rolled out it was a huge pain in the rear and caused various problems and made things more complicated for no apparent reason.

    • kill_dash_nine@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, I can easily remember the commands to tail the logs because it’s journalctl -fu and I always think “fuck you” as I’m typing that.

    • kbotc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most of the bolted on services are rather shitty. ResolveD in particular is straight up hot garbage unless the only thing you are comparing it to is nscd. I like shipping all my logs to a centralized service and journald just gets in the way. It feels like they took upstart, bolted on some really crappy daemons,

  • z3rOR0ne@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I use runit on Artix. I wasn’t around for the init wars, but dove into the rabbit hole of Debian email exchanges, where lots of shade was thrown around because of suspicions over corporate influence on Linux, and Canonical dropping the ball because of their Licensing on their competitor init, Upstart.

    I reviewed videos of Poettering going on about it, adamently placing systemd as the hill he was willing to die on.

    I read the Torvaulds email complaining about Kay Sievers being an asshole. Looked at how Kay Sievers famously refused to fix early boot problems with systemd. Read Laurent Bercot’s technical break down of why even from a software design level, systemd should be called into question.

    Its all interesting, and on my home desktop, I decided to only use Artix, Void, Gentoo, or Devuan over any of the others for as long as I can.

    At work, I don’t care. Do I wish that runit or s6 was more predominant and widely used? Absolutely. Imho both init systems are just more minimal and their implementations are so solid, they are two of the very few pieces of software I can say are finished. No notes, no new features, and because of the minimal attack surface, barely any security patches have been necessary.

    Due to their following of the UNIX Philosophy, both runit and s6’s source code can be reviewed in an afternoon, as opposed to systemd which has taken me considerably more time to parse through (though I’ll admit systemd has some decent comments in their code that helps out).

    But at work, while I have my preferences and opinions, the systemd debate isn’t even close to the top of my list on arguments I’d like to have at the work place.

    On Lemmy otoh, lol. 😁

  • IverCoder@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    ·
    1 year ago

    Are you using Linux for ordinary daily tasks like browsing, gaming, and coding? Then SystemD is perfect for such systems. No need to use distros that sell the lack of SystemD as their main selling point—it’s more trouble than it’s worth. Avoid SystemD haters like the plague.

    Do you use Linux for enterprise servers? Then SystemD is just one of the options for you, go try all of them out to see what’s best for such workflow.

    • Count Regal Inkwell@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Wooow, 180 seconds (which probably won’t even get to timeout) when shutting down my computer. My life is ruined forever because I had to wait sooooo much. /sarc

          • Dave.@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Tell that to my laptop when I’m at the airport and boarding.

            It’s the same with windows - push power button, “Windows is installing some updates, do not turn off y…” (screen goes blank from the forced shutdown as I continue to hold the power button)

            If I’m turning off my computer, I’m turning it off for a reason. Any delay gets in the way of my reason nearly 100 percent of the time.

            • Count Regal Inkwell@pawb.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Apologies, I will literally never be able to relate to this entire line of thinking. If I’m at an airport and it’s close to boarding time, my laptop has already been shut down ten minutes ago because when I first hear the announcement I see that as ‘computer time is over’ and consider this just generally the smart thing to do (… And you can just hibernate or disable wifi/bluetooth and leave the thing on anyway)

              Generally if I’m turning off my computer I understand that as something that could take a minute or three because a small wait is not this huge dramatic thing y’all make it out to be.

              • Dave.@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                It’s not a dramatic thing for me personally. 90 percent of the time my laptop politely sleeps when I ask it to, the remaining 10 percent of the time it’s going to sleep regardless of its opinion on the matter.

                Small edit: I have sometimes been the unlucky recipient of a bundle of windows updates that that 15-20 minutes to complete. One thing about Linux distros, they don’t pull that kind of stunt in shutdown.

                And lucky you to be able to not have any last minute things to deal with at the airport that get foisted upon you by clients / coworkers. Computer time is never over.

            • WldFyre@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              You don’t turn off/restart at the end of every day when you get off your computer for the day??

              • Dave.@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Nope. Not when my laptop is connected to my monitors/dock at home. The screen locks, the monitors time out and power off, everything else remains on/dormant. When travelling with it, it just hibernates.

                If I had a desktop PC and it had fans/etc I would probably hibernate it rather than shut it down. As I understand it windows tends to do this by default these days as well.

              • Dave.@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Would be nice, but it (that is, windows in this case) won’t go to standby because by the time you get to the shutdown/update stage, power management is shut off.

                Instead it turns into a lovely mini furnace in its pocket in my travel bag until windows deems that it has finished.

                Edit: and that’s what I find alarming. Once , I just hit the power button and closed my laptop and got on the plane, and about 15 minutes later I went to get something from my bag in the overhead compartment before we took off. Holy shit, was my laptop hot, and it was 70 percent through an update. Presumably it was throttling due to heat and the throttling was making the updates even slower so it was a vicious cycle.

          • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            2 minutes might not be, but 27 minutes is.

            Source: accidentally hot removed a drive that was mounted. Systemd was not thrilled.

  • hottari@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t get the hate as well. It’s great for running services and system administration.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    38
    ·
    1 year ago

    Everything everybody else said plus everything with Systemd is just… more complex. With OpenRC, it felt like I could keep all the information I needed to use and administrate it in my head. With Systemd, I have to look stuff up all the time.