LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General
User Name
Password
Linux - General This Linux forum is for general Linux questions and discussion.
If it is Linux Related and doesn't seem to fit in any other forum then this is the place.

Notices


View Poll Results: Are you for or against systemd?
Love it! 10 9.35%
Don't like it, prefer a different one! 30 28.04%
HATE IT!! 34 31.78%
Could not careless! 33 30.84%
Voters: 107. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 04-20-2017, 12:12 PM   #61
alabit
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2014
Location: Hoffman Estates, IL
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 27

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Keep the debate open


I am against systemd. In my opinion whats done with Gnome and the dependencies is unnecessary. More, systemd not replacing anything broken or even dysfunctional. I am not an expert only a user, but what I see with Win 8 and Unity - it was a bad idea. What I see with CMS, Templates on the Web - cookie-cutter boring and many times insufficient. The end result was, is, and always going to be decided not by arguments but by common sense and usability.
Common sense says anything monolithic is fragile, it was fragile back then when the HURD was attempted and it is fragile still, it is a fact. systemd is still small and focused, but I have a bad feeling it is not going to stay so for much longer.
As ideologically, absolutely nothing systemd can or [will] be able to do [in the future] is ever going to impress me. This is what impressed the heck out of me: https://devuan.org/
Forking is impressive!

Last edited by alabit; 04-20-2017 at 12:34 PM.
 
Old 04-20-2017, 12:48 PM   #62
Timothy Miller
Moderator
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Arizona, USA
Distribution: Debian, EndeavourOS, OpenSUSE, KDE Neon
Posts: 4,001
Blog Entries: 26

Rep: Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521Reputation: 1521
Quote:
Originally Posted by alabit View Post
I am against systemd. In my opinion whats done with Gnome and the dependencies is unnecessary. More, systemd not replacing anything broken or even dysfunctional. I am not an expert only a user, but what I see with Win 8 and Unity - it was a bad idea. What I see with CMS, Templates on the Web - cookie-cutter boring and many times insufficient. The end result was, is, and always going to be decided not by arguments but by common sense and usability.
Common sense says anything monolithic is fragile, it was fragile back then when the HURD was attempted and it is fragile still, it is a fact. systemd is still small and focused, but I have a bad feeling it is not going to stay so for much longer.
As ideologically, absolutely nothing systemd can or [will] be able to do [in the future] is ever going to impress me. This is what impressed the heck out of me: https://devuan.org/
Forking is impressive!
If you run super recent development versions (not that there's anything that's not a development version), it's not so small and focused. They've taken over networking now also, and something else that escapes me.
 
Old 04-20-2017, 01:24 PM   #63
alabit
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2014
Location: Hoffman Estates, IL
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 27

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Miller View Post
I and something else that escapes me.
Yes, DNS, keyring, authentication.. this might also be show of aging already. The framework of the one-for all platform that is not happening. A lot of things have changed since, more of the infrastructure is moving off the client closer to the gateway, sand-boxed VMs behind firewalls that never touch physical wire and have no need for authentication, etc..

If thinking that newer is better is a mistake, trusting the outdated as the newest must be a bigger mistake then...
 
Old 04-20-2017, 01:39 PM   #64
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 19,872
Blog Entries: 12

Rep: Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053Reputation: 6053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turbocapitalist View Post
That leads to an observation about the open source assertion. An interesting comment I saw elsewhere addresses the complexity of the systemd code. It's so complex, non-modular, and interconnected that although it can be argued that it might fulfill the letter of the concept of OSS, it fails the spirit of the concept. For something to be OSS, the code must be made available. In the case of systemd, it is not possible for someone of either meager C skills or without the possibility and, more importantly, a willingness to invest an unreasonably enormous amount of time to get going at changing the code. So in practice the code is not available.

This is backed up partially with Red Hat's stated way of working against us. Red Hat's model is to make things complex enough to require a support contract:Let the buyer beware.
that article certainly does not back anything like that.

i'm not saying i'm all for red hat and foss politics, but to say they are working "against us" (whoever "us" are) borders on paranoia.

anyhow, the linked article does not back your statement. it's just a shallow review of a company.
 
Old 04-20-2017, 01:51 PM   #65
Turbocapitalist
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Distribution: Linux Mint, Devuan, OpenBSD
Posts: 7,258
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713Reputation: 3713
Quote:
Originally Posted by ondoho View Post
anyhow, the linked article does not back your statement. it's just a shallow review of a company.
Yes, the article is shallow marketing, except for that juicy quote. See past the marketing, which is of course only going to say wonderful things. The actual quote there does unambiguously back the statement that Red Hat thrives on complexity, especially since it comes from high up in the company. The quote is actually from a blog, but the blog is unavailable to many so I had to link to the low-quality article.

As time passes it is harder and harder to fork a clean distro based on Debian. Devuan has a good shot at it, but since the first release will be based on Jessie, there is still a lot of work to be done and on a moving target no less. Here's a random example:

Code:
$ apt-cache --recurse depends openssh-client | awk '$1=="Depends:" && $2 ~ /^systemd/' | wc -l
8  
$ lsb_release -rd
Description:    Debian GNU/Linux 8.7 (jessie)
Release:        8.7
 
Old 04-20-2017, 03:57 PM   #66
Xeratul
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2006
Location: UNIX
Distribution: FreeBSD
Posts: 2,653

Rep: Reputation: 255Reputation: 255Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Miller View Post
If you run super recent development versions (not that there's anything that's not a development version), it's not so small and focused. They've taken over networking now also, and something else that escapes me.
It is interesting what you wrote.

turbocapitalist pointed out some part of the real problem, actually.

If I understand well, this would means, that with Systemd, the Systemd+Kernel of Linus+Pckges (Linux distro) is likely non longer according to GNU, and it could even fall into OSS.

Quote:
GNU is a recursive acronym for "GNU's Not Unix!",[8][11] chosen because GNU's design is Unix-like, but differs from Unix by being free software and containing no Unix code.[8][12][13] The GNU project includes an operating system kernel, GNU HURD, which was the original focus of the Free Software Foundation (FSF).[8][14][15][16] However, non-GNU kernels, most famously Linux, can also be used with GNU software; and since the kernel is the least[citation needed] mature part of GNU, this is how it is usually used.[17][18] The combination of GNU software and the Linux kernel is commonly known as Linux (or less frequently GNU/Linux; see GNU/Linux naming controversy).

Richard Stallman, founder of the GNU project
Richard Stallman, the founder of the project,
(Src: wikipedia)

The founder may have opinion about Systemd?

Edit [Pic]: This first project was awesome, and led later to numerous distributions.
Man, it looks today completely difference to me. Since Hurdle, have changed many things in Linux.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	HURD_Live_CD.png
Views:	46
Size:	2.4 KB
ID:	24816  

Last edited by Xeratul; 04-20-2017 at 04:12 PM.
 
Old 04-20-2017, 04:05 PM   #67
hydrurga
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Pictland
Distribution: Linux Mint 21 MATE
Posts: 8,048
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925
Richard Stallman on systemd:

Quote:
Thus, it wasn’t a surprise that, when asked whether he had an opinion on the systemd controversy, he replied with a flat “no, I don’t.”

“I’ve never seen it, I’ve never used a system that had it; I know it’s free software, so ethically speaking, it’s not an issue – it’s just a convenience question.”
Source: http://www.networkworld.com/article/...-and-more.html
 
Old 04-20-2017, 08:16 PM   #68
rokytnji
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Mar 2008
Location: Waaaaay out West Texas
Distribution: antiX 23, MX 23
Posts: 7,064
Blog Entries: 21

Rep: Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470Reputation: 3470
I respect systemd about as much as it respects /usr/local/bin.

In case you don't know. systemd defaults to using /usr/bin.

https://github.com/coreos/tectonic-forum/issues/60
 
Old 04-20-2017, 08:20 PM   #69
ChuangTzu
Senior Member
 
Registered: May 2015
Location: Where ever needed
Distribution: Slackware/Salix while testing others
Posts: 1,718

Rep: Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857Reputation: 1857
Quote:
Originally Posted by hydrurga View Post
Richard Stallman on systemd:



Source: http://www.networkworld.com/article/...-and-more.html
Will be interesting to see if his viewpoint changes when Trisquel 8 comes out and is using systemd, since its based on Ubuntu Mate 16.04 and Lubuntu 16.04

PS: The irony of posting from Ubuntu Mate in VM.

Last edited by ChuangTzu; 04-20-2017 at 08:21 PM. Reason: forgot I was in VM...lol
 
Old 04-21-2017, 12:25 AM   #70
Xeratul
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2006
Location: UNIX
Distribution: FreeBSD
Posts: 2,653

Rep: Reputation: 255Reputation: 255Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChuangTzu View Post
Will be interesting to see if his viewpoint changes when Trisquel 8 comes out and is using systemd, since its based on Ubuntu Mate 16.04 and Lubuntu 16.04

PS: The irony of posting from Ubuntu Mate in VM.
I believe that he did not meet Systemd yet, because it will be not according to GNU philosophy, although there is "some" source code.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 04-21-2017, 01:16 AM   #71
hydrurga
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Pictland
Distribution: Linux Mint 21 MATE
Posts: 8,048
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xeratul View Post
I believe that he did not meet Systemd yet, because it will be not according to GNU philosophy, although there is "some" source code.
Oops, I accidentally approved the above post instead of hitting the quote button. Serves me right for using the computer straight after waking up. Seems no way to revert my thumbs-up. :-)

Anyway, you perhaps missed the bit in the quotation I cited, Xeratul, where Richard Stallman said that he considered systemd to be free software. All source code is available. Why are you intent on ignoring the facts in this case?
 
Old 04-21-2017, 01:43 AM   #72
Xeratul
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2006
Location: UNIX
Distribution: FreeBSD
Posts: 2,653

Rep: Reputation: 255Reputation: 255Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by hydrurga View Post
Oops, I accidentally approved the above post instead of hitting the quote button. Serves me right for using the computer straight after waking up. Seems no way to revert my thumbs-up. :-)

Anyway, you perhaps missed the bit in the quotation I cited, Xeratul, where Richard Stallman said that he considered systemd to be free software. All source code is available. Why are you intent on ignoring the facts in this case?
Because of the very interesting post of turbocapitalist regarding code source of systemd.
 
Old 04-21-2017, 02:00 AM   #73
hydrurga
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Nov 2008
Location: Pictland
Distribution: Linux Mint 21 MATE
Posts: 8,048
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925Reputation: 2925
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xeratul View Post
Because of the very interesting post of turbocapitalist regarding code source of systemd.
Whether code is complex or not is not the question. A considerable proportion of system-related Linux code could be considered complex.

apt-get source systemd (or equivalent) will get you the source code for systemd.
 
Old 04-21-2017, 02:17 AM   #74
Xeratul
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2006
Location: UNIX
Distribution: FreeBSD
Posts: 2,653

Rep: Reputation: 255Reputation: 255Reputation: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by hydrurga View Post
Whether code is complex or not is not the question. A considerable proportion of system-related Linux code could be considered complex.

apt-get source systemd (or equivalent) will get you the source code for systemd.
thank you, I ll re-look at the code.

Joke: does GIT needs to be installed to download the source code using apt-get?
 
Old 04-21-2017, 07:24 AM   #75
alabit
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Nov 2014
Location: Hoffman Estates, IL
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 27

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by rokytnji View Post
I respect systemd about as much as it respects /usr/local/bin.

In case you don't know. systemd defaults to using /usr/bin.

https://github.com/coreos/tectonic-forum/issues/60
As a user I did not have a clue until I started kicking the tires on bitnami images, and came across systemctl, and the fact that making things work often required copying from /usr/local/bin to usr/bin. It was kinda odd then, and even today I do not know what to make of this change. I would guess in a "cloud" environment this change makes sense, otherwise bitnami would not be depending on systemd. But what about /usr/local? I would also guess in the cloud where your scripts can re-purpose clusters of boxes from file-servers to web-host to database-servers in an instance, /usr/local/bin should make more sense than /usr/bin. I never found any reading on the reasoning why systemd is using /usr/bin, but I would like to know.

[My latest assumption is that bitnami do not like the fact either, but being an images provider they took the road of least resistance, and the simplified install and configuration systemd offers over SysV].

Last edited by alabit; 04-21-2017 at 07:43 AM.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
  


Reply

Tags
init, systemd


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 On
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: systemd 230 Launches with DNSSEC Enabled by Default in systemd-resolved LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 05-22-2016 11:41 AM
Can't access full journalctl from script via systemd service even though user is in systemd-journal group iwtbf Linux - Newbie 0 02-19-2016 02:44 PM
LXer: Why pro-systemd and anti-systemd people will never get along LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 05-15-2015 11:44 PM
LXer: Is systemd as bad as boycott systemd is trying to make it? LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-03-2014 05:50 PM
Boot Delay 30min: systemd-analyze blame systemd-tmpfiles-setup.service BGHolmes Fedora 0 07-27-2011 09:02 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35 PM.

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
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration