Dude, you can find horror stories for [/i]anything[/i], and they'll always be the most numerous because people who use systemd and have no problems with it don't write rave stories about systemd because in day-to-day usage they don't even
notice it. Nearly all major distros now use it, and the sky never fell, just as it didn't fall when people mass-adopted X, modern browsers, and other "bloated" programs. There are millions upon millions upon
millions of Linux boxes with systemd invisibly ticking away in the background, always-on servers with systemd processing untold millions of requests every day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cynwulf
Speaking of which - if this were Windows, creating this many problems, some would be in this thread dismissing it as "micro$hit" or whatever, or blaming it for being "closed source"...
|
If Windows created "this many" problems, it would be considered an absolute
revelation compared to the usual Windows standard.
Quote:
Perhaps it does for you, however it does not for others who were used to "administering Linux" they way they'd been administering it for decades.
|
A lot of Windows users lamented that their AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS wizardry lost its mojo when 2000 and XP came around and ripped out Windows' own form of init scripts. Too bad for them, and too bad for you, too. Systems change, and old people who refuse to change their old habits will be left behind. If you think getting GNOME to work without systemd is a pain, just wait until other programs start using using systemd APIs and more systemd plugin daemons are rolled out.
Quote:
Yes, cars have gone beyond being serviceable by the driver...
|
Because cars that are "serviceable by the driver" do not meet the needs of most drivers, nor the regulatory agencies that govern the manufacture and sale of cars. At least Linux boxes don't kill enough people to have to worry about the latter. ;)
Quote:
Red Hat, the corporation funding systemd development and the first to introduce it in it's enterprise products, sells support contracts for a living...
|
Pretty sure Red Hat support contracts don't come with my Arch or Xubuntu installations. As for
scary corporations, their funding (and from much scarier sources than Red Hat--
IBM of all people is one of the biggest sources of Linux's funding, who would have imagined such a thing in 1988 when they were trying to lock down the whole PC market?) is everywhere in the Linux world, and the more popular Linux gets, the more of it there will be. We live in a pay-to-play society, and unless we go full communist tomorrow, it's going to stay that way in the foreseeable future. That's the price for having an OS with broad hardware support and everyday accessibility.
Furthermore, Red Hat initially didn't want it, and wanted to stay with sysvinit, Lennart Poettering wrote it on his own time and only when Red Hat saw the prototype were they interested.
Quote:
Or... use what used to work perfectly for decades?
|
It worked perfectly for old Unix grognards, but old Unix grognards are becoming irrelevant, as is
the entire Unix platform outside of Linux and MacOS (and MacOS, of course, has launchd, which systemd draws much influence from). It was an old solution designed for an old world of simpler, mostly stand-alone computers maintained by expert sysadmins and gradually hacked up into a convoluted mess that varied greatly from distro to distro, and didn't play that nicely with forests of USB port dongles that can be connected and disconnected at will, constant mounting/unmounting (which most users want done automatically
every time), ubiquitous massive networking, home users (remember in 1983 a home computer was a toy like a TRS-80, not anything we would understand as a "real computer") and other things System V's authors never considered or could consider.
If systemd makes interoperability with Solaris or BSD more difficult, there are not enough Solaris or BSD users for the people with power in Linux development to care.
Quote:
The svchost comparison is not even worth bringing up, because it is not a viable comparison.
|
It is, because svchost does a lot of the things systemd does, just much more crudely because it was designed by committee 30 years ago.