LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 01-08-2018, 11:04 AM   #31
chblock
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2018
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 13

Rep: Reputation: Disabled

I see there is some debate about Systemd. Just started using Linux again after a long time away. Came back to find Systemd. Oh the anguish. Yeah it's a big move and makes me feel like I'm just starting out again. I can understand the motivation for it, but as a desktop user I would been happier to stick with init. Just hoping it's not terribly hard to learn and understand.
 
Old 01-08-2018, 11:20 AM   #32
jsbjsb001
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Earth? I would say I hope so but I'm not so sure about that... I could just be a figment of your imagination too.
Distribution: CentOS at the time of this writing, but some others over the years too...
Posts: 2,112

Rep: Reputation: 958Reputation: 958Reputation: 958Reputation: 958Reputation: 958Reputation: 958Reputation: 958Reputation: 958
Quote:
Originally Posted by chblock View Post
...Just hoping it's not terribly hard to learn and understand.
It's as hard (or easy) as anything else... do you want to learn? If the answer is yes, well it shouldn't be any harder than anything else IT related. If you already know some things about Linux and are committed to learning it, you should have little to no problem learning it.
 
Old 01-08-2018, 12:06 PM   #33
hazel
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2016
Location: Harrow, UK
Distribution: Debian, Crux, LFS, AntiX
Posts: 2,469
Blog Entries: 6

Rep: Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190Reputation: 1190
Learning to use it isn't difficult. The problem is the vast amount of "fire and fury" that has been generated by this subject.

Basically systemd comes with a pack of binary programs that do the work of the old initscripts. This gives you a faster boot, but of course it's much more opaque, and many people think it's "Not the Unix Way".

Each of these services is controlled by a configuration file in Windows .ini format, similar to the files used by freedesktop.org. I think these "service files" are easier to write than scripts, but for a lot of folk, that isn't the point.
 
Old 01-08-2018, 02:30 PM   #34
chblock
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Jan 2018
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 13

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Yeah I'm sure it's no different than any other Linux sub-system I've had to learn, but it's work and that means my time. In any case I found that on my Debian system I can remove and replace Systemd with the old familiar Sysvinit so that's what I did. Running Sysvinit saves me some trouble, at least until I must use Systemd.

I agree relying on binaries with limited flexibility is not the Linux way. I mean that's what Linux and GNU is all about, flexibility. You can always modify source, but not all of us have the skill or inclination to modify things like that. It's always a lot easier to modify a script which I do all the time. I ~can~ modify and compile code, but I'm not particularly good at coding and prefer to avoid it.

I've been away from Linux for a while and have only come back recently a few versions later. This whole Systemd thing kind of blindsided me, didn't realize things had changed that much in my ol' faithful Debian dist. I can see where Systemd could be faster for enterprise systems with lots of chores on startup, but for me on my Debian desktop Sysvinit actually seems faster, could be just because there's less console output.

Last edited by chblock; 01-08-2018 at 02:47 PM.
 
Old 01-09-2018, 01:55 AM   #35
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 10,200
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522Reputation: 2522
Quote:
Originally Posted by ////// View Post
https://s10.postimg.org/4el7okcx5/systemd.jpg
took a moment to "get it" lmao
i don't get it.
 
Old 01-09-2018, 05:41 AM   #36
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,186
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247Reputation: 1247
Quote:
Originally Posted by chblock View Post
In any case I found that on my Debian system I can remove and replace Systemd with the old familiar Sysvinit so that's what I did. Running Sysvinit saves me some trouble, at least until I must use Systemd.
It's important to realise that there's no compulsion to use systemd. There are Linux distributions which do not use systemd, there are also at least two Debian derivatives which avoid it.
 
Old 01-09-2018, 12:00 PM   #37
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,078
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171
As I've said, things changed – substantially – when we started filling racks with computers, and rooms with racks, and warehouse-sized buildings with rooms. Try to centrally-manage that!

One of the things that, IMHO, Microsoft got right (they learned it from IBM ...) was a cohesive strategy for centralized management. You can manage hundreds of Windows boxes from one central console.

But for a long time, "Linux was the odd-man-out," and things were even worse when you had a mixture of operating-system types to manage – Linux alongside Windows and OS/X, and boxes by the hundreds, some of them physically very far away and hard to get to. This is a very, very common scenario.

We're talking serious costs here, and considerable time, and plenty of opportunity to make mistakes that would be very difficult to discover and, once discovered, to locate! The opportunities for human-error and human-oversight needed to be substantially reduced along with the human effort.

These were major motivations for the SystemD project. It had become completely unmanageable to "tinker with init-files" and to try to make the system-level processes work together when they couldn't even talk to each other. Multiply this by hundreds and hundreds of boxes and something simply had to be done.

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 01-09-2018 at 12:05 PM.
 
Old 01-09-2018, 02:35 PM   #38
ChuangTzu
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix, Devuan, FreeBSD
Posts: 1,085

Rep: Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by sundialsvcs View Post
As I've said, things changed substantially when we started filling racks with computers, and rooms with racks, and warehouse-sized buildings with rooms. Try to centrally-manage that!

One of the things that, IMHO, Microsoft got right (they learned it from IBM ...) was a cohesive strategy for centralized management. You can manage hundreds of Windows boxes from one central console.

But for a long time, "Linux was the odd-man-out," and things were even worse when you had a mixture of operating-system types to manage Linux alongside Windows and OS/X, and boxes by the hundreds, some of them physically very far away and hard to get to. This is a very, very common scenario.

We're talking serious costs here, and considerable time, and plenty of opportunity to make mistakes that would be very difficult to discover and, once discovered, to locate! The opportunities for human-error and human-oversight needed to be substantially reduced along with the human effort.

These were major motivations for the SystemD project. It had become completely unmanageable to "tinker with init-files" and to try to make the system-level processes work together when they couldn't even talk to each other. Multiply this by hundreds and hundreds of boxes and something simply had to be done.
and yet Linux still managed to dominate the global supercomputers, mainframes etc....funny how with all of the supposed limits if SysV and the benefits of systemd, the majority of Linux growth was with SysV....
PS: NASA and other agencies are still refusing to use systemd, they are still specifically using SysV because of the control and reliability it provides. Just a thought.
If not for Gnome, I do not think systemd would have been "pushed" on the distros. And yes I am in the category that it is a RedHat power grab, that will eventually lead to a RedHat kernel, funny that as systemd is picking up more an more kernel roles.
 
Old 01-09-2018, 02:45 PM   #39
ChuangTzu
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix, Devuan, FreeBSD
Posts: 1,085

Rep: Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854
Just throwing this out there:
https://twitter.com/systemdsucks
 
Old 01-09-2018, 03:50 PM   #40
sundialsvcs
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 9,078
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171Reputation: 3171
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuangTzu View Post
and yet Linux still managed to dominate the global supercomputers, mainframes etc....funny how with all of the supposed limits if SysV and the benefits of systemd, the majority of Linux growth was with SysV....
PS: NASA and other agencies are still refusing to use systemd, they are still specifically using SysV because of the control and reliability it provides. Just a thought.

If not for Gnome, I do not think systemd would have been "pushed" on the distros. And yes I am in the category that it is a RedHat power grab, that will eventually lead to a RedHat kernel, funny that as systemd is picking up more an more kernel roles.
Personally, I think that the Ubuntu kernel is far more influential in the Linux world than Red Hat ... but Red Hat very specifically targeted the corporate-IT market segment, and tailors its entire viewpoint to that segment's needs and perspectives.

There's absolutely no question that "SysV works," and the beauty of Linux is that you can choose. It's certainly easy to understand why the owners of a supercomputing cluster would not want to switch, and I'm quite sure that there are plenty of commercial installations that – for the exact same reasons – won't switch, either.

All that having been said, I think that Red Hat et al were "taking the pulse of" a very legitimate business requirement that was being manifested by their target markets. And so, they responded to it. Although I'm not entirely pleased with all that they did – I think that it should have been much more modular – it does work and is (mostly) stable.

The sheer beauty of Linux is that it can simultaneously(!) accommodate two "such very, very different approaches," with grace and style.

("Heh ... tell that to the poor schlebs who are wrestling with "Windows 10!")

Last edited by sundialsvcs; 01-09-2018 at 03:51 PM.
 
Old 01-10-2018, 12:45 PM   #41
DavidMcCann
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Jul 2006
Location: London
Distribution: CentOS, Xubuntu
Posts: 5,125

Rep: Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709Reputation: 1709
The thing that strikes me about these endless arguments is that they'll make it very difficult to find information: searching for "systemd" will throw up a dozen hissy fits for every informative post. It's like searching for "Mate" and getting every post that ends "Thanks, mate."
 
Old 01-10-2018, 01:35 PM   #42
Myk267
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2012
Location: California
Posts: 401
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
The worst part of systemd are the UI timers whenever something goes wrong. It just doesn't take 90 seconds to figure out if a drive can be mounted or not, or if the UUID of a partition changed since the last boot. It fires me up a bit just to think about it. It's - so close - to nudging me to go find almost anything else, each time I see one, because waiting around on a timer, for a "highly concurrent socket activation" based init system, blows my mind in the most negative way possible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMcCann View Post
The thing that strikes me about these endless arguments is that they'll make it very difficult to find information: searching for "systemd" will throw up a dozen hissy fits for every informative post. It's like searching for "Mate" and getting every post that ends "Thanks, mate."
If your searches begin and end with a single word, you're going to have a bad time.

I've had good success rates doing searches for my systemd situations.
 
Old 01-10-2018, 02:10 PM   #43
ChuangTzu
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix, Devuan, FreeBSD
Posts: 1,085

Rep: Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854Reputation: 854
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myk267 View Post
The worst part of systemd are the UI timers whenever something goes wrong. It just doesn't take 90 seconds to figure out if a drive can be mounted or not, or if the UUID of a partition changed since the last boot. It fires me up a bit just to think about it. It's - so close - to nudging me to go find almost anything else, each time I see one, because waiting around on a timer, for a "highly concurrent socket activation" based init system, blows my mind in the most negative way possible.



If your searches begin and end with a single word, you're going to have a bad time.

I've had good success rates doing searches for my systemd situations.
apparently just go here
http://0pointer.net/blog/
here
https://plus.google.com/+LennartPoetteringTheOneAndOnly
and here
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues

although all answers end the same..."closed not a bug" or "its a feature not a bug".
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
amarok might be memory hog jdwilder Linux - Software 0 07-09-2006 06:13 PM
Firefox - SUCH a memory hog !! wearetheborg Linux - Software 6 06-04-2006 04:56 PM
Danger, Danger, Danger. Dead Rat Killed My Slack vdemuth General 2 07-12-2004 04:54 PM
Memory Hog? AekaGSR Linux - Newbie 2 07-04-2003 11:55 AM
memory hog jct842 Linux - Newbie 2 02-28-2002 01:20 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:52 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration