systemd-journald is one of the main problems. It can not be effectively replaced by another logging system such as sysklogd which becomes not just a nuisance, but a hindrance to trying to to descale systemd. You can add sysklogd, but that's beside the point.

Just as udev might not be needed in all systems, journald might not be needed also, so why is it mandatory? In the case of udev, there are plenty of people who do run mknod to create a static devfs, and plenty of people who would like to stick to sysklogd for plaintext logs rather than deal with journald which only outputs in binary which effectively is useless when dealing with issues between systems. Either both systems have journald or reading the binary log is useless. If you want multi-system log reading you have to effective create a duplicate logging system which is a waste of system resources.

The only required part of systemd should have been init, (and maybe a child process to udev) but sadly that's not the case.

It's still not a program that does one thing and does it well.

4 members found this post helpful.

I wish that it was as simple as uniting on a project community that is working for everyone. When you read what our current leader is saying, you don't have much choice if you choose to be outside of his eco-system:

https://plus.google.com/+LennartPoet...ts/8RmiAQsW9qf
http://linuxfr.org/nodes/86687/comments/1249943
And there are many other things he has said like this, leaving alot of people who was using this stuff already, with a broken upstream system path. With leadership such as that, it would only make much more sense if system-management really was OS agnostic, and even project maintainer agnostic.

Unlike what some people are saying, there are plenty of people doing something to rectify the situation. The problem is that there is no organization or motivation, and continual ridicule being passed around to serve Poettering's mastership. Please, I hope people speak up who should be the real leaders of the system components we need. We need a real direction.

5 members found this post helpful.

A real direction would be to ignore fadware and anything against the philosophy of UNIX and return to the core principles of UNIX and return to software that abides by not just the UNIX philosophy, but also software universal to every branch of the UNIX family tree to where very little system proprietary software exists except those utilities surrounding and working with the Linux kernel.

Linux, BSD, Solaris, and other UNICES don't and shouldn't need to work against each other by trying to kill off other branches with fad designed, ego driven software that's nothing short of poisonous to UNIX on the whole.

You don't see BSD, Solaris, or any other UNIX derived OS trying to implement software that's toxic to the whole of UNIX or even Linux.

7 members found this post helpful.

The BSDs write *tons* of software that benefits no one but themselves. Lennart is doing nothing but the same. While I disagree with the direction he is taking, and primarily with absorbing/deprecating other software in favour of systemd-dependent plugins, trying to say he is doing something somehow more malicious than what is done in the BSDs is patently false. Most programmers for the BSDs don't give one iota about Linux compatibility, just as Lennart doesn't care about BSD compatibility.

3 members found this post helpful.

True but then again the BSDs by design don't have much software to begin with, and the rest they port in. The software they develop works for their system and kernel.

However the BSDs did actually give us OpenSSH from OpenBSD so technically the BSDs did give us something actually. So far by calculation, something is better than nothing.

2 members found this post helpful.

Quote: Yes, I don't think BSD is really too relevant anymore, and I think that this implied requirement for compatibility with those systems when somebody hacks software for the free desktop or ecosystem is a burden, and holds us back for little benefit.

Portable FOSS is a huge selling point for me. I switched machines back and forth between Linux and BSD while keeping the whole application stack unchanged. Unix legacy and API standards made that possible.

If such stuff becomes Linux-only, there is absolutely no point for me in using that. I don't like to be locked into a platform, especially not into Red Hat's "CoreOS" platform.

To add to the desktop discussion: A unexceptional desktop environment, which runs on different OSes, even with flaws, is a great thing to have IMHO. A mediocre Linux-specific or worse distro-specific desktop environment is useless crap and can go into trash right away. If I want a desktop vendor lock-in, I choose Apple or Google, at least that stuff doesn't hurt the eyes.

Better to have a half-assed desktop environment than a half-assed operating system laying underneath.

We'd be better off running Windows 9x...

1 members found this post helpful.

That is all totally possible. My concern over the division going is primarily directed a Poettering because the projects he absorbed directly impacts my systems. The BSD project to deal with the interface issues might not help us at all, despite the promise. Self-interest baloney can happen anywhere. This is why I rather not talk about creating more projects, but who can actually lead.

2 members found this post helpful.

I'm pretty new to linux, but I find this debate fascinating. My favorite thing so far about the os is getting my hands dirty and learning about how things work at a basic level. In this respect, one program bundle automagically controlling my entire system doesn't sound like much fun.

Maybe systemd can add a daemon to reduce pervasiveness?

Edit: Hopefully systemd-registrycleaner is in the works as well.

And why do we need to mess with /etc?

You can get your hands dirty with systemd installed there are various reasons why people don't like systemd but none of them include not being able to get your hands dirty.

Jesus...

Attached Thumbnails

 

4 members found this post helpful.

He even *looks* like a young Bill Gates.

'Systemd...we'll take over so you don't have to!'

2 members found this post helpful.

This is funny as hell! Good one! (I know it was sarcasm/a joke, and I really am LMAO because it's so true!)

Could be a Bill Gates clone or cyborg created to subvert and destroy Linux?
P.S.
Has he ever said: "I vant your cloze, your bootz, und your modorzykle"?

1 members found this post helpful.