How do we kill the ever-growing cancer that is systemd?
switch to bsd
>>52078953
Really? Hmm. Where can I go to find more information about BSD? Can you help me find the pastas from the old BSD general that I used to ignore from about a year ago?
>>52078967
https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/
about the pasta, you might find at rbt.asia
>>52078944
There's only one surefire set of steps to kill systemd
1) Learn basic shit about the things you try to talk about
2) Realize that systemd is actually great and that you've been meme'ing about it because your shared hatred of obscure targets with strangers on the internet fills a void in your heart
>>52079015
Thanks man! :)
> This is not: Why you should use BSD instead of Linux.
Can you give me a good perspective on any non-systemd related reasons that make BSD objectively superior to Linux?
>>52079047
There's only one surefire set of steps to kill proprietary software
1) Learn basic shit about the things you try to talk about
2) Realize that proprietary is actually great and that you've been meme'ing about it because your shared hatred of obscure targets with strangers on the internet fills a void in your heart
>>52078944
systemd-malwared
>>52079047
I thought Systemd hate was one of the few things that wasn't a meme since you have to know what you're doing to get by without it at this point.
>>52079047
>There's only one surefire set of steps to kill the nigger-kikes
>
>1) Learn basic shit about the things you try to talk about
>2) Realize that nigger-kikes are actually great and that you've been meme'ing about it because your shared hatred of obscure targets with strangers on the internet fills a void in your heart
What is actually bad about systemd? I am genuinely curious, I see so much hate, but does this really affect me as a normie Linux desktop user?
>>52079123
>does this really affect me as a normie Linux desktop user?
It does if you want to encrypt anything. Rdrand was rigged about a year ago making any and all attempts and encryption utterly futile, unless you got the patch or avoided the bad update.
>>52079075
>proprietary software
>systemd
>Look mom, I know all the memes!
>>52079144
What does a CPU instruction have to do with systemd?
>>52078944
>muh sysvinit
>muh minimalism
>muh 1970 mainframes
>muh do one thing do it well
Fucking luddites.
>>52079123
>What is actually bad about systemd?
Nothing. /g/ just likes to complain and be contrary
>>52079123
it's mostly ideological reasons that people dislike systemd. the scope of the project at this point has amounted to a monolithic subkernel, absorbing features an init system never needed to touch. it creates a large attack surface and dense codebase that makes it difficult for any newcomer to adequately pick apart what's wrong and fix it themselves if they were so inclined. the reason for its mass adoption is a calculated push by a multi-billion dollar company in an effort to "standardize" the userland to make enterprise Linux a more palatable and easier sell and likely because it will give them greater overall control of the ecosystem.
systemd works, but i don't want it on my box, and i still have that choice for now which is nice, but its worming itself into other major projects where there's no real reason for it to be a dependency, which is alarming. it will become harder and harder to avoid if your desire is to avoid it. i personally don't want something handling the decryption of my luks drives also handling my network access in one "tidy" package, i'm not sure how that's supposed to be appealing.
it can make your life appear simpler if you're new to linux, it's easy to see why nothing is wrong on the surface when you look at its concept, but if you've been around to see its scope creep and intent blatantly shift to go far beyond the boundaries in which it was initially pitched, you might see why some people are against it.
>>52079065
>userspace and kernel space are developed by the same developers
>BSD is genetically UNIX
>better documentation
FreeBSD will implement their own version of systemd. I hope that will be more nice, better documented and a bit less invasive that the original systemd.
I still like systemd.
>>52079075
>systemd
>proprietary
I use openRC on gentoo, and it's a lot more complicated than systemd is. I prefer openRC on my gentoo box because it primarily is a hobby computer, but systemd is a much better alternative.
>>52079123
Nothing. Actually brings more sanity to the Linux world.
>>52079210
>I use openRC on gentoo, and it's a lot more complicated than systemd is
how so
>>52079206
>FreeBSD will implement their own version of systemd
Actually FreeBSD is currently working on an implementation of launchd, OS X's init system.
>>52079202
>systemd is a giant binary running in pid 1
>>52079173
>muh do one thing do it well
What's wrong with that?
>>52079229
I understand that other team is also working in a systemd like thing apart of launchd.
Hope the better wins.
>>52079237
It resulted in the clusterfuck that is sysv-style init scripts
>>52079237
Only works partially and modern systems cannot do the things we expect from them with that philosophy of development. Linux is becoming what Multics wanted to be because that.
Even Linus Torvalds says that modern systems doesn't scale well with "muh one thing do well"
I still feel that principles are nice for learn good programming skills, tough.
>>52079206
>>52079229
Well, if BSD is going into the shitter as well, then what other OS can we turn towards to avoid the *d cancer?
>>52079243
That just means they weren't doing the "do it well" part.
>>52079271
Use a UNIX from the 70's or learn and accept the fact that the UNIX philosophy has his limitations.
>>52079286
You can't manage a system well with a billion little pieces that only do one thing each
>>52079269
>Multics wanted to be
History lesson please! I've heard of Multics the OS that was eventually ripped off by Unix (which is supposed to sound like Eunuchs - a stripped down version of Multics with shorter, easier to type commands and fewer unneeded features,) but what do you know about it? What was Multics trying to achieve?
Is Gentoo immune to systemd?
Is BSD open source?
>>52079337
Multics wanted to be the future operating system, secure out of box, scalable, a operating system who was complex and expectedo to do almost everything you can expect of a very minimal (console only) Linux setup.
Of course, being that since his conception, doomed it to fail, because a project of that size in the early 70's was doomed to fail almost all time. Then two developers (Thompson, Ritchie) decided creating UNIX, a capped version of Multics. A operating system so simple that almost could be view as "a collection of unrelated programs" (fun fact: security in early versions of UNIX was inexistent) but easily developable and portable. In that base, the things began to run and conform the basic of the what a Linux (Or Unix box) is expected to do.
If you think a little, you could concieve UNIX as a reactionary OS in certain ways. And also a proof that Evolution makes the things that supposedly Inteligent Design only could do, albeit in a much slower way.
>>52079202
"multi-billion"? Are you talking about Red Hat Inc?
If so, minor disclosure I work for Red Hat as some underling.
Also, we are in no way a "multi-"billion dollar company. We have not broke the 2bil in a FY yet. FY15 was 1.7B. Hardly multi.
Now you go on about it being monolithic when in reality it is not. That is like saying GNU core utils is monolithic.
If by monolithic you mean a single binary, that is just plain wrong, sorry.
If you mean because all the programs are in a single source repo, then sure, but you have to start calling GNU core utils "monolithic sub-subkernel, absorbing features an base system should never needed to touch."(Seriously, core utils includes: md5sum, sha*sum, cut, join, uname, whoami, etc[why does md5sum have to share the same code repo with whoami?)
If you want to make an argument with core utils that you can select which to compile/not compile/each is segregated into its own directory. Guess what, so is SystemD. You don't have to compile every program shipped in the repo and the code is divided nicely up into sub directories http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/tree/src
Please stop spreading FUD and actually come up with a legit reason as to why.
>>52079271
Windows
>>52079387
No. Offers it as option.
>>52079405
Yes, negative freedom oriented and not copyleft.
>>52079387
No.
Gentoo already officially supports systemd as an alternate init system and has several major packages that depend on it. It will become the default in time.
>>52079449
Me again..
Also people claiming to be jumping ship to BSD as it is not monolithic and all bundled together.
The BSD source, ALL of it(kernel, base system, init system, etc) IS IN A SINGLE REPO. It is designed that way.
systemd coreutils when?
>>52079448
>Of course, being that since his conception, doomed it to fail, because a project of that size in the early 70's was doomed to fail almost all time.
Shit, I mean
>Of course, being a complex project in the early 70's was almost a death sentence since the begining.
I'm sleepy and the fucking qemu-img still doesn't finish.
>>52079491
Never. That doesn't make any sense.
>>52079548
Yes it does. Replace the GNU coreutils with systemd software, so Poettering can fulfill his dream of creating systemd/Linux.
>>52079548
I could see it happening busybox style
>>52079449
>If so, minor disclosure I work for Red Hat as some underling.
HAI GAIZ! I TOTALLY WORK AT RED HAT! PAY ATTENTION TO MY OPINIONS GAIZ!
>>52079580
Except I never stated an opinion. If you want my opinion, I do not like it. BUT the arguments against it are not valid arguments.
>>52079580
>>>/reddit/
Daily reminder Linus has nothing against systemd:
>I have to say, I don't really get the hatred of systemd. I think it improves a lot on the state of init, and no, I don't see myself getting into that whole area.
>Yeah, it may have a few odd corners here and there, and I'm sure you'll find things to despise. That happens in every project. I'm not a huge fan of the binary logging, for example. But that's just an example. I much prefer systemd's infrastructure for starting services over traditional init, and I think that's a much bigger design decision.
>Yeah, I've had some personality issues with some of the maintainers, but that's about how you handle bug reports and accept blame (or not) for when things go wrong. If people thought that meant that I dislike systemd, I will have to disappoint you guys.
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/15/06/30/0058243/interviews-linus-torvalds-answers-your-question
>>52079631
Linus has been brainwashed by Poettering. Everyone jump ship to TempleOS.
>>52079651
How are you going to shitpost on TempleOS?
>>52079631
>Daily reminder Linus has nothing against systemd:
Daily reminder that Linus Torvalds is a macfag and no one on /g/ cares what that fucking casual has to say.
http://www.cultofmac.com/162823/linux-creator-linus-torvalds-i-love-my-macbook-air/
>>52079672
He's since dropped his Macbook Air and uses a Chromebook Pixel.
http://www.geek.com/chips/linus-torvalds-is-making-the-chromebook-pixel-his-primary-laptop-1541940/
>>52079449
Why do I think you have a sister named Helen?
>>52079687
>uses a Chromebook
>>52079651
You misspelt OSX, anon
>>52079707
>>52079687
>>52079672
He just installs Fedora on it though, what's the big deal?
>>52079672
>that damage control
Also
>linus torvalds
>fucking casual
>>52079721
It means he's given Google money. I believe the Macbook Air was a gift from Apple, and he told them he promptly installed Fedora on it anyway.
>>52079721
Proprietary hardware with NSA backdoors. Though I guess that's only a problem if your some creepy paranoid loser.
NOTHING TO FEAR NOTHING TO HIDE NOTHING TO FEAR NOTHING TO HIDE NOTHING TO FEAR NOTHING TO HIDE
>>52079721
Damage control.
>>52078944
Create something that's actually better than systemd and hopefully a drop-in replacement for either SysV or systemd.
>>52079733
Epic maymay.
Do you posted that from your libreboot used chinkpad with two minute battery life and 1024x768 screen size?
>>52079733
but what if Linux doesn't have drivers for NSA's spyhardware?
>>52079746
>Do you posted that from your libreboot used chinkpad with two minute battery life and 1024x768 screen size?
Epic maymay
>>52079746
You can get LibreBoot on X220s now, which get pretty decent battery life. My old one used to pull 12 hours with the extended battery.
>>52079747
>but what if Linux doesn't have drivers for NSA's spyhardware?
You're still putting yourself at an unnecessary risk, and Apple likely has builtin hardware keyloggers, so enough of your private info is being surveilled, though to be fair the NSA would probably have to be within reasonable proximity to you in order to remotely access that data since it's unlikely the hardware outside of the Operating System has direct communication with the internet.
>>52079770
Every vPro-enabled Intel processor or chipset has a 3G radio built into it for the anti-theft features. While Intel claims it's not a backdoor, it's at least an undocumented potential vector.
>>52079791
>3G radio
Oh fuck. I'm using intel right now. How do I remove this?
>>52079801
Removing the processor should do it
I use systemd because it's stable and maintained by a young energetic team that is setting the bar in init structure. Setting the bar so high in fact that my goodness how can a small dinosaur userbase not see the benefits. Also if you got nothing to hide you shouldn't worry, if you got something to hide you should be in jail
>>52079746
>chinkpad
But ThinkPads have a rootkit. Why would anyone willingly use a ThinkPad if they cared about surveillance?
>>52079818
>Removing the processor should do it
But that would stop it from working, wouldn't it? You're memeing me, aren't you?
>>52079770
Why don't you eat shit?
Hardware backdoors exist in all Intel processors. Maybe they even lump them into modified ARMs. The only way to know if there's a backdoor or not is to look at the high level hardware designs themselves and manufacture it yourself. And you'd better make sure that the tools you're using to make it don't add in backdoors themselves.
>>52079449
>If so, minor disclosure I work for Red Hat as some underling.
go to sleep lennart
>>52079821
>If you got nothing to hide you shouldn't worry, if you got something to hide you should be in jail
http://reddit.com/r/ILoveTheGovernment
>>52079801
You can EM-insulate the fuck out of your computer.
>>52079821
>if you got nothing to hide you shouldn't worry, if you got something to hide you should be in jail
If you don't have anything to say, you shouldn't have free speech by that logic
>>52079830
The 3G radio in vPro-capable Intel processors is baked in, and as far as I know can only be software disabled in BIOS settings.
>>52079844
>You can EM-insulate the fuck out of your computer.
What's the first step, there?
>>52079791
sauce?
Wikipedia is not a source, nor is the link provided within
>>52079867
>Wikipedia is not a source, nor is the link provided within
What if we provide that link, and just don't tell you it's a wiki-link?
>>52079863
The absolute first step? Research what EM/RF insulation even is. In this case you might want to go with radio frequency (RF) insulation. I don't know if there is a way to do it in a good-looking fashion. Probably just slap some insulation all over your case?
You could also just use your computer in a thick cement bunker underground. That isn't too practical though if you don't have a military budget. But it's okay, because you're already living in your mum's basement with shitty reception. :^)
>>52079880
sorry, the link referenced in wikipedia is a article how it is coming soon. As much as NSA funding is nice, I don't see the business model of integrating 3G if people don't want it. The anti-thief devices aren't about data as what serious theft ring is going to not take an offline backup of the hard drive the first thing they do. The idea is to make the computer unusable. A computer that can't internet is unusable is most peoples eyes.
>systemd thread
>ctrl+f "runit"
>0 results
Why are you guys ignoring the best init option?
>>52080078
>Using Jewnit
>>52078944
Start writing the software you want to see.
>>52080252
>Start writing the software you want to see.
Where do I start gathering the education to do that?
Move to Windows, OS X, BSD, a GNU/Linux distribution that does not use systemd, or use another init system if you feel like spending your time hacking a solution together from cobbled parts.
>>52080268
>Move to Windows, OS X
Stopped reading right there.
Holy shill!
>>52080272
Those are options. You may not like them, but they are options.
>>52080275
>Those are options. You may not like them, but they are options.
Drinking water, orange juice, coca-cola or bleach are all also equally valid options for someone seeking refreshment.
>>52080261
If you want to learn programming
http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/matthias/HtDP2e/
http://racket-lang.org/download/
>>52078944
>Le systemd sucks xD
Fuck off. Linux needs a modern init and service manager like systemd. You might enjoy jerking off to minimalism and muh unix philosophy on the internet, but there are some people out there who have actual jobs to do and just want a system that works well and quickly.
>>52079240
systemd and launchd aren't too disimilar IIRC
>>52078944
First off, systemd is not an init system, it has an init system as part of the systemd suite. systemd is a project to build a standardised lowlevel userland for Linux. The project is pretty comprehensive and it delivers a lot of functionality under one umbrella. It does away with a lot of older, often undermaintained software packages, which were traditionally used to assemble a low level userland.
Which is where the contention comes from, as a system suite systemd is restrictive for Unix virtuosi who are used to tailor a system with wit, ingenuity, a lick and a prayer and a couple dozen of unrelated packages. systemd makes such knowledge useless.
The faction that thinks that systemd is Linux's Hiroshima, finds all the added functionality bloat, unnecessary and dangerous, as it is all under development in one project.
All the systemd jokes stem from the comprehensiveness as a low level system suite. People against it love to joke that one day systemd will write its own kernel.
There is a lot of FUD and hate going around. Some arguments do have merit, a lot of eggs in one basket is certainly true, but as with all things in life, it depends which tradeoff you prefer. Do you want a suite of well designed software, working closely together, so that system management is streamlined or do you want the complete freedom to tailor your own low level system with a lot of time tested, interchangeable components.
I have no desire to be a low level system designer, so I prefer systemd. I don't hate traditional init systems though. If a Linux system has one and I need to work with it, I'm still happy it boots and starts the necessary services.
>>52079631
/thread
Based linus is right as always
>>52080335
An excellent strawman. Well shilled, anon.
>>52080390
>can't argue against my opinion
based openrc shill
>>52079449
The red hat shilling is literally real.
>>52080390
It's not really a strawman when OP presented 0 arguments at all. The only thing we can do is assume he thinks the standard things that most anti systemd luddites do. If you're going to be like that we can't possibly discuss anything with OP because OP didn't have an argument in the first place so anything we respond to is a strawman.
>>52079449
We are better than you.
--SUSE Employee
http://www.voidlinux.eu/
>>52080396
kek, no, I prefer daemontools derived inits.
I'll just leave this here because nobody else has mentioned it yet:
http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd
The contention against systemd comes from shitty development practices, poor design, lockin, and using politics to force broken software into major distros. If it was just another effort at standardising things nobody would give a shit. See: LSB, which has been around forever.
The underlying problem that systemd has revealed, though, is how linux development is mostly under the control of US-government-backed corporations. Skilled independent programmers don't have enough collective free time to contribute significantly, which is why stuff is undermaintained to begin with.
>>52080078
>runit
>viable as init
Kek/20
>>52080493
You do make a better desktop product. FFS Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation sucks so much balls. 7 is even worse then 6. With 6 you could at least run a fun desktop and still have the server bits with RHEL6 Server, with 7 you have nothing, no media player(desktop/workstation only), if you do desktop/workstation you don't have docker(most development is moving to this.)
So I actually run a *buntu distro. We really need to over haul our desktop and the packages included.
I don't know much about linux, but wouldn't systemd be the idea vector for embrace, extend, extinguish?
>>52080678
Yes, yes it is. Amongst other things.
>>52080678
How?
>>52080595
>implying you could come up with a single coherent argument why it isn't
>>52080595
why not?
>>52080678
I find that difficult, really. FOSS guys are so thin skinned for anything can look like 3E or look like FUD they wouldn't tolerate it before forking and forking.
>>52080569
>http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd
Where are the arguments? They're almost links of news older than a year.
>Stability Promises
>they're using linux
>>52080726
For the same reason Plan9 isn't a viable OS: Almost nobody uses it.
Also
>2015
>a simple init will replace a lowlevel userspace
Okey. We would replace a complete legion of US soldiers with a guy with a knife.
>>52080869
>sees list of links to arguments
>waaah! they're all links! where are the arguments!?
>>52080915
>bunch of links to articles of news and opinion articles are arguments.
Nope, they're no arguments. They could be used as proof but by themselves they aren't arguments, sorry.
>>52080889
Popularity has nothing to do with whether or not an init system can do its job properly.
>>52080945
Yeah, but the problem still persists.
If a tool isn't used then a tool is useful?
And also, you can't reeplace the entire systemd with a fucking init only. You want to reeplace an army with a guy armed with a knife.
>>52080964
My favorite thing about runit, you cannot use the shutdown command as it does not know about /run/initctl so you have to use their programs to control it instead of a common IPC.
>>52080987
>>52080964
If you want to switch away from systemd then you'll need to install equivalents for a number of other things systemd has assimilated, yes. It's very doable though. See: Gentoo, Slackware, Void, which all seem to have no problems.
>if a tool isn't used then is a tool useful?
Sadly there is only a passing correlation between technical merit and popularity in the software industry.
>someone posts "why is systemd bad exactly?"
>the only people to respond post the shittiest possible answers
Sometimes I wonder if it's just blatant falseflagging.
>>52080927
If you're really this dumb just kill yourself.
>tfw almost nobody on 4chan is just pretending to be dumb to troll you anymore but are legitimately this dumb
>>52080964
>been using various init systems for over a decade now
>missing absolutely nothing
>systemd is successfully shilled by redhat stifiling creativity as systemds scope continues to creep and large projects continue to needlessly tie themselves to systemd so you cannot use anything else
Go home shill or dumb kid who has never actually worked with servers, at no point in time have I ever not been satisfied with the tools that already exist.
What we do need is for things to be MORE compliant with the Unix Philosophy, 1 tool to do 1 job well while having nice standardized apis so you can easily replace each part. It allows for a great dev environment and creativity instead of the monolith Systemd/Linux which wouldn't be so bad if it was just another choice but soon that wont be such an easy thing not to choose as HEAD for many projects will just tie themselves to Systemd forcing small groups of devs wanting to do something new and intresting to fork old versions of a ridiculous amount of software.
It's only going to get worse.
>>52080964
And why do I need the rest of systemd in the first place? They promised an init system.
>>52081024
>IT'S DUMB BECAUSE HE DOESN'T WANT TO DO MY JOB
Average IT pro.
>Go home shill or dumb kid who has never actually worked with servers, at no point in time have I ever not been satisfied with the tools that already exist.
For every supossedly guy who says "have" worked with servers and say that systemd is crap I can found 3 they say systemd is better than bread with butter.
Sorry, kid, home servers doesn't count.
>>52081054
Why do you have redundant pathways to control you hungry levels if you need only one to do that job?
Why does the kernel have a VT emulator, an, Virtual Machine, two or three IPC models, millions of code lines, characteristics who aren't present in other Unix-like kernels and countless of etceteras?
Simply: Evolution.
>>52081054
Which program shipped with SystemD do you not want?
>>52081095
>Simply: Evolution.
So you are saying it 's not an intelligent design.
>>52081095
Oh piss off you stupid cunt, most IT "professionals" are a joke. They get into the field because they want an easy desk job. All I do at work when there isn't maintenace or rolling out new systems is R&D, at home I barely do anything "entertainment wise" and haven't since I was in my teens.
This is my life kid, take your shitty leddit opinions with you.
>>52080987
>>52080993
Signalling init to shutdown is something we should be getting away from. It's an unnecessary special case. Better if all that's needed is SIGTERMing everything.
>>52078944
Why do we need to kill it?
Why not split it into different programs that do all the things systemd does by itself.
>>52081114
Inteligent design was tried with Copland and Multics.
You know the rest of the history. These operating systems aren't alive today.
>>52081124
A ass blasted faggot. My job here is done :^)
>>52081127
Keked hardly.
>>52081149
>A ass blasted faggot. My job here is done :^)
Whatever you need to say to make yourself not feel BTFO kid. Don't you have a consumer /g/eneral thread to be in?
>>52081134
Probably because they tried it and failed.
>>52081134
It is different programs. They just share a common git repo.
A lot of programs were "creeped" into it. Just so they can say program A works with the IPC of program X.
Instead of having the user go I want program A version 2, now I need program B which supported version is 6, program C is 8.
SystemD is not one giant binary blob. The code is laid out in sub directories with proper naming that you can find the program you want easily. You can also exclude programs from being built.
>>52081169
Nah, I prefer to make your proctologist more rich instead :^)
>>52081184
This.
Fun fact: developers of systemd also where the developers of these "creeped" programs.
>>52081196
And once they were moved over they still maintained the code. IE the dub guys still code dbus, the udev guys are still on udev. Nothing changed. Just the location of the code.
>>52081185
>hurr I'm le ep1c trolling you XD
>:^) :^) :^) :^) :^) :^) :^) :^) :^) :^)
>ur butt is hurt dude
Go read a book you dumb nigger, the only one you're trolling is yourself.
>>52081184
>SystemD is not one giant binary blob.
Whats the problem then? I dont see any reason to hate it.
>inb4 binary logs
Try analyzing 500 different text logs by yourself
>>52081210
Change is scary and I wet the bed until I was 13.
>>52081232
>these projects
>this is how you feel inside
lmao, I'm butthurt alright :^)
>>52081234
>Try analyzing 500 different text logs by yourself
Is that supposed to be hard?
>binary logs somehow solve this problem
>>52081234
Fuck every other argument, the way we're going is clearly wrong for these reasons:
>What we do need is for things to be MORE compliant with the Unix Philosophy, 1 tool to do 1 job well while having nice standardized apis so you can easily replace each part. It allows for a great dev environment and creativity instead of the monolith Systemd/Linux which wouldn't be so bad if it was just another choice but soon that wont be such an easy thing not to choose as HEAD for many projects will just tie themselves to Systemd forcing small groups of devs wanting to do something new and intresting to fork old versions of a ridiculous amount of software.
>>52081234
Wrong guy.
Also with regards to binary logs. You can set journald to write plain text logs instead. That feature did not go away. Also anyone who does this is a bad admin and need to read into ELK stack. Especially if they are managing more then one server.
>>52081264
Is coreutils monolithic?
>>52081264
>>What we do need is for things to be MORE compliant with the Unix Philosophy, 1 tool to do 1 job well while having nice standardized apis so you can easily replace each part. It allows for a great dev environment and creativity instead of the monolith Systemd/Linux which wouldn't be so bad if it was just another choice but soon that wont be such an easy thing not to choose as HEAD for many projects will just tie themselves to Systemd forcing small groups of devs wanting to do something new and intresting to fork old versions of a ridiculous amount of software.
>houses aren't houses if they don't have a inclined roof made of ceramic tiles
>support my special snowflake needs adapting TO MY WAYS
>>52081280
The GNU coreutils? If so no, they're fairly modular.
>>52081280
Almost all GNU binaries have some grade of "monolithic" in them.
>>52081323
Yes I was talking about GNU Coreutils.
So they are modular, why? They are all shoved into a single directory in the same code repo.
>>52081319
Systemd detractors are almost like the tumblrinas of low level userspace this days.
>>52081319
>reads over my stance
>hurr special snowflake
You're just the most useless person.
>>52081340
What do you mean? They can generally be used without dependence on the other GNU coreutils. Though GNU software is definitely not very compliant to the Unix Philosophy.(more like the opposite generally)
>>52081344
>all he does is personally attack people who disagree with him
>he isn't the tumblrina
deluded/10
>>52081370
>all he does is personally attack people who disagree with him
>>52081370
My point on the coreutils is that the sytemd components CAN be used independently.
In fact a lot of people used parts of SystemD before SystemD was even around(dbus, udev are the 2 big ones).
>>52081395
I never said they couldn't but simply being able to use some components of SystemD independently doesn't change anything about my argument. Most GNU software is bloated crap.
Daily reminder that systemd is FOSS (Free Open Source Software) and that it is good software that fulfils the needs of modern devops, sysadmins, regular users and even application developers. Since work on systemd project restarted in 2010 and it's initial inclusion in Fedora Jan 2011 it has gained code contributions from over 600 developers worldwide and became the default init system and session manager in every major GNU/Linux distribution since 2012. Developers from each of these have commit access and have helped to design and shape systemd to fit their needs and unify core system between distributions over the last 5 years.
However as great of an improvement as it has proven to be it has attracted many paid trolls and mentally ill Linux users who spread lies and FUD about it, a large group of these single out developers and attack them with constant trolling, abuse, stalking and even death threats. Many of these 'people' are from the *BSD camps; after Linux usage and contributions sky-rocketed 15 years ago they have been on a constant mission to cause trouble, including making threats of violence and rape against people who create GPL licensed code.
There are also thought to be many of these people on the payroll of Microsoft to try and destroy strong powerful FOSS projects by negative campaigning and lie/FUD spreading. Fortunately as usual for Microsoft their FUD campaign and paid shills turn up 4 years too late and don't have technical arguments, making it obvious what they are: paid trolls.
"I think your attitude is pretty typical of systemd detractors, and that attitude is exactly why systemd is making a victory sweep across all major Linux distributions;
Since you are in total denial of any existing problems with sysvinit, you are of course unable to suggest any alternative to it, or begin any coherent work on an alternative to it. The denial also suggest a lack of technical insight into the problem, and the pathetic lack of any alternative development work also suggest a lack of technical ability to make such an alternative.
This seemingly leaves systemd detractors with only one option; negative campaigning. So they have wasted years of slandering Lennart Poettering and other open source developers and companies, and whining, ranting and trolling on web forums, but without any real technical argumentation.
Using derogatory terms, like "bloat", or "Windoze crap" aren't technical argumentation, just like copy-pasting unattributed quotes from random sites about "Unix philosophy" doesn't convince anybody serious either.
You are also alienating people who may have been sympathetic to developing alternatives to systemd; who wants to join a bunch of anonymous people who rant like lunatics, and who seems to enjoy smug negative attitudes against other open source developers.
So to sum up; you are just a loud minority who conducts negative campaigning, seemingly without any ability to gather people to construct a positive alternative to systemd. As long as you deny any problems with sysvinit, and deny any positive merits of systemd, you will be unable to analyse the situation and therefore paralysed into inaction. This of course will mean, that Linux distro after Linux distro will switch over to systemd. Enjoy the future with systemd on every Linux distro; your negative attitude made it possible."
>>52081412
THen I don't understand your whole "monolith systemd/linux" point.
If the old way was also a giant monolithic pile of crap, why make a big deal now out of systemd?
>>52078944
systemd - check
wayland - check
btrfs - check
Get on my levels, grandpas.
"I remember being severely disillusioned by this in my early days. I read some article that explained how a "spell" program can be written to report the spelling errors in a file. It uses 'tr' to split into words, then "sort" and "uniq" to get a word list, then "comm" to find the differences. "cool" I thought. Then I looked at the actual "spell" program on my university's Unix installation. It used a special 'dcomm' (or something like that) which knew about "dictionary ordering" (Which ignores case - sometimes). Suddenly the whole illusion came shattering down. Lots of separate tools only do 90% of the work. To do really complete work, you need real purpose-built tools. "do one thing and do it well" is good for prototypes, not for final products.
The thing that annoys me most about systemd is that I didn't write it first!"
- Neil Brown
http://lwn.net/Articles/576078/
"The problem for Gnome and KDE is, that systemd is vastly superior to anything out there, and that it will help them dump loads of hard to maintain code, and give them easy access to make powerful distro-agnostic programs.
systemd provides a common, uniform Linux plumbing system that makes life easier for all user program developers. So of course Gnome and KDE will start to take advantage of systemd, why shouldn't they?
The main problem with those who for some reason or another doesn't like systemd, is that they are incredibly lazy. Instead of actually getting together to make an alternative development stack to systemd, they rant against Poettering and spew empty platitudes about "UNIX philosophy".
The most pathetic example of this anti-systemd laziness, is of course "ConsoleKit". It has now been unmaintained for +1½ years, but it is a crucial piece of infra-structure for any Desktop. But instead of either maintain it or make an alternative, anti-systemd people just rant against Gnome for no longer making it a priority to support this piece of abandonware. All rant and no work.
[...]
Yes, that is true last time you checked, and next KDE edition (KDE SC 5/Plasma 2) will of course also run on *BSD. But with reduced functionality on all non-systemd systems, compared with the systemd version.
This is not because of some sinister conspiracy, but because systemd offers easy use of many nice features that KDE and Gnome (and LXQT etc) would like to use, and non-systemd systems doesn't provide.
The point is exactly, that systemd is a very nice uniform Linux plumbing system, and that DE's are starting to take advantage of that."
>>52081419
>those high levels of developers and contributions
Systemd eventually will suffer of the same evolutive forces that makes GNU/Linux the de facto UNIX standard in the world.
:^)
"I’m trying really hard not to suggest launchd here (so I won’t). The idea of registering everything up-front with a broker and then letting IPC / timers / HW events start things from there (in cascade fashion) is still the right architecture. Even the linux die-hards have essentially grasped the necessity of systemd (even though they’re going to hate on it for awhile longer)"
- Jordan Hubbard, FreeBSD co-founder
>>52081440
I'd want to be like you, but I need my xmonad setup, which rules out Wayland, and btrfs still scares me a bit (I didn't feel safe enough to start using ext4 until 2012).
"I don't personally mind systemd, and in fact my main desktop and laptop both run it."
- Linus Torvalds, ITWire Interview.
>>52081477
Do you know to code?
Why do you try to start o contribute in a Wayland compositor who supports Xmonad paradigm?
The power to destroy that fucking rootkit called X11 is in you my friend.
>>52081477
Not xmonad, but have you looked at sway?
https://github.com/SirCmpwn/sway It is more of an i3 clone for wayland.
>>52079047
It's a 'if you don't make it as a kernel developer, you go develop systemd' thing.
Mostly political software, the developers are just trying to stay relevant.
You'll realize once X becomes systemd dependant.
>>52081419
>>52081435
>>52081444
>>52081457
>>52081473
>>52081487
The random people posting sound arguments you cannot deny are the paid shills, not the guy posting paragraphs upon paragraphs of pro-systemd rhetoric conveniently lacking any real life scenarios etc.
>tfw this kind of stuff is what won over the Linux community
I'd like to imagine most of the Pro-systemd posts like this as well as the generally shit responses by the anti-system people is just the GNAA successfully running the already shit community into the ground.
>>52081439
Because it's making it's making it worse. At least there are other working replacements for the coreutils and even Glibc that generally just work and you wont have tons of trouble with nonsensical dependencies(at least for the coreutils).
>>52081518
I still try to understand what is the "political" thing about systemd and why "politics" are bad.
After all, we are still humans.
>>52081525
>paid shills
>FOSS
Nice meme.
>>52081525
Why do you change to some BSD instead of trying to make the world dance at your tune?
You could be more happy.
>>52081518
>X
>becoming systemd dependant
X is dying. Very slowly, but is dying.
>>52081525
How so? There are distros out there that do offer you options. Debian you can remove systemd same with gentoo. And there is replacements for stuff like udev(mdev), journalctl(rsyslog is still being worked on).
Yes some desktop environments are consuming some systemd only parts but over all the desktop is still there and most desktops this sub uses are not the ones switching.(The ones moving over are ones like KDE and GNOME that want a more complete polished desktop from end to end.)
>>52081548
Well by some of his reasoning BSD is worse at it then Linux is.
>>52081539
RedHat is big into Systemd and they pay people to just work with Systemd, also you clearly didn't read the whole post. I was making fun of the idea because the baseless paragraphs of pro-systemd rehtoric looks WAYYY more like "paid shilling" than some random person saying it sucks.
>>52081548
>I can't denounce your argument
Then don't reply to me, the way they're going about developing this software is clearly bad and the ecosystem would be a million times better if they devoted time to making things more modular and improving APIs instead of throwing away everything else to tie themselves to the ship.
Yall motherfuckers need to read this:
Structural and semantic deficiencies in the systemd architecture for real-world service management, a technical treatise
http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0/
Why don't you stupid fucks complain about X.org if you're gonna complain about something doing 5000 things?
Xorg does these things really poorly, Systemd has never given me an issue. Why aren't you foaming at the mouth at other offenders of this idea?
>>52081616
>darknedgy
Dropped.
>>52081591
Because I said again:
More modularity, isn't the answer. We expect systems to do shit that can't scale well on too modular and orthogonal systems.
I agree we need more stable APIs in the Linux World, but that isn't the reason to go back to "muh 70's unix philosophy" way of making things.
After all, the Unix philosphy is a reactionary set of principles.
>>52081591
>RedHat is big into Systemd and they pay people to just work with Systemd,
...and the kernel
...and most of the core toolchain to build everything
...and gnu programs
...and majority of security patching
...and a big chunk of general userland.
You need to up your game Rajeesh.
>>52081616
>treatise
>in a blog
Whitepaper in an acredited journal or just is a piece of opinion.
>>52079237
>>52079286
The actual problem of do one thing and do it well is that the more separate modules or services you have, the more intricate the system becomes and the more IPC you need.
That's why systemd heavily relies on dbus, which standardizes the way processes communicate.
A similar problem is monolithic vs modular kernel or even vim vs IDE.
>>52081585
It's non-trvial, gentoo shouldn't really count because it's basically a higher-level LFS of course you can choose something else.
Slackware is the only well-known distro which can be semi-easily installed and not use systemd. Yeah you can replace systemd on many distros but it is not the default and you cannot even choose another option in the installer. You have to hack it together POST install which doesn't count for me as for the majority of people that makes Systemd THE option not simply a choice.
>>52081620
>this other thing is bad so ignore what the current thread is about
The main issue imo is this, nobody is talking about systemd breaking:
>What we do need is for things to be MORE compliant with the Unix Philosophy, 1 tool to do 1 job well while having nice standardized apis so you can easily replace each part. It allows for a great dev environment and creativity instead of the monolith Systemd/Linux which wouldn't be so bad if it was just another choice but soon that wont be such an easy thing not to choose as HEAD for many projects will just tie themselves to Systemd forcing small groups of devs wanting to do something new and intresting to fork old versions of a ridiculous amount of software.
>>52081624
>We expect systems to do shit that can't scale well on too modular and orthogonal systems.
Like?
>>52081626
Yeah but RH owns the main devs of Systemd they don't own the kernel etc.
POOINLOO
O
O
I
N
L
O
O
>>52078944
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/
Read this before complaining.
Fucking normies and their lack of system admin jobs using ubuntu.
I hate to break your linux brains but would you kindly fuck off and be employed using linux.
>>52081667
>UNIX philosophy
We're not in 70s, grandpa. Packard Bell is bankrupt now.
>>52081667
Multithread programming, hardware in constant change of state, resources that appear and disappear without warning, stateless system, concurrency programming, interactive systems, consumer electronics...
>>52081686
Because the garbage scope creeping bloated shitware we have today is so good.
Modern webbrowsers are a perfect example of this.
>>52081705
I don't see why the things you've mentioned have to be monolithic or what being modular would do to negatively affect what you've mentioned.
>>52081730
That proves that you never worked with really old versions of UNIX.
The first thing is UNIX as described by "muh UNIX philosophy" hasn't a proper IPC, only text streams...
>>52081749
I'm not quoting it exactly, and am just using the term mainly to refer to the concept of 1 tool to do 1 job really well and adding to it with the quality APIs for modularity.
>>52081395
soo... Mr Nothing To See Here... why was it necessary to fork eudev?
>>52081513
I do, actually. But I'm too busy trying to finish my Master's to have time for anything else. Though a Wmonad project sounds like it would be right up my alley.
>>52081686
>packard bell
Hmm.. that symphony of old startup sound
>>52079743
Actually that is a bretty gud boint.
The problem is systemd is too big to replace.
>>52079935
It woild be okay if they had put it into the nic but the CPU? Fuck those kikes
>>52080290
Water is the only thing on the list that doesn't make you fat
>>52081767
"1 tool to do 1 job really well"
What that means in practice for you?
"Write a word processor who formats the text and print it"
Or
"Write a parser to read a plain text file describing the text, a font engine to manage the characters passed to a kerning program, who formats acording to the rules established by a break and hyphen engine, etc, etc, etc and then pass them to a program who send orders to the kernel to activate the printer, and other to translate the output of all the chain to some language that the printer can understand"
The second option is the most "true" Unixy and when you apply you start to see their limitations.
>>52080335
>he wants the D
I want it too!
why contain it
>>52081869
I don't see why option 2 is limiting, no matter what you're doing the same things anyway except by ensuring modularity and writing good APIs you make it trivial by comparison to replace or improve certain pieces of the chain instead of throwing it all away for whatever hot new monolithic design you want.
I've learnt not to care, as I should not.
People use linux for all kinds of shitty reasons in shitty ways. systemd, containers and whatnot.
I'll continue using Gentoo and OpenRC, which is what's great about linux, that I get to do my thing.
>>52082016
The problem is you will need a kerning engine with some paragraph placing capabilities, you font engine will have some kerning engines, you hyphen engine the same, etc. And they need more complex comunication to avoid they ruin the work doing by the other engines.
When you need some redundancy between programs is when the unix phil fails.
>>52081869
>>52082016
May I point you two fine gentlemen to TeX and LaTex?
Honestly at this point I just gave up.
Call me when we get to packagectl, that's gonna be fun.
>>52081518
>You'll realize once X becomes systemd dependant.
Who gives a shit about X
>>52079168
Nothing at all. I have no idea what 9144 is talking about. RDRAND/RDSEED data is now just passed through the rest of the Linux kernel CSPRNG instead of just being XORed in at the end, which actually reduces the trust in it and makes it like any other entropy source.
>>52079123
I won't say "nothing", but it's an improvement on SysV, OpenRC, and a huge improvement on Upstart. It's not monolithic, but it does bring more aspects of the base system under the control of one project.
The binary logging is for a good reason and there's a lot of tools available for it, but it can still be on the annoying side.
I don't think anyone's really tried using it with initramfs yet or any LiveCD-type distro.
The only really big problem with systemd is the same as the problem with pulseaudio: Lennart Poettering is a cunt, which threatens the project and its inter-project relationships with other projects, much like Hans Reiser's personality killed reiserfs (and his wife).
>>52078944
im running plan 9 and 9front text mode aswell as inferno on top of slackware learning stix/9p2000
communications protocals over my network. Driver support will be better by the time systemd runs all distros. (If it ever does).
Reminds me of using linux in the mid 90's.
>>52082120
I feel it can still work though I am arguably a bit out of my depth here as my main focus has not been programming though I am far from completely inexperienced on the subject.
On a higher level though what I've stated still stands as a good model, stable and standard APIs and some level of modular design for example trivially being able to replace components of say firefox(stuff like pdf.js and the media player) with mpv etc.
(yes I know you can already do this by hacking it together with mozplugger and greasemonkey scripts)
>>52082312
>but it's an improvement
In what obscure cases is it an improvement, I have many systemd and non-systemd systems and at no point has the systemd boxes ever seemed better instead I just had to take another path to get to the same information.
>>52082346
>Driver support will be better by the time systemd runs all distros
It doesn't run on stuff like Gentoo, Slackware and VoidLinux. Big whoop those distros are far from the leaders/major shareholders in the Linux userbase, As software targetting the majority of the Linux userbase continues to move forward and systemds scope continues to creep it will only become more difficult for non-systemd distributions to exist.
Why was kdbus dropped or withdrawn?
>>52082433
What we will likely see is a major split between systemd/linux and regular linux, with the former being backed by the US military via Redhat and the latter still being more prominent than the BSDs.
>>52078944
Do you people all have autism or something? What's soo bad about systemd anyway?
>>52082525
Read the thread you dumb faggot.
>>52082433
I said i run inferno os on top of slackware.
Driver support for plan9/9front by the time systemd takes over linux distros.
READ YOU DOLT.
>>52082553
>calls me names
>too stupid to understand the incredibly simple reply I made
You implied that it will take forever for systemd to take over all distros and I stated that it has already taken over pretty much all of the relevant distributions(userbase wise). Idiot.
On a spinning HDD, can't touch this
>>52081439
because he's a bsd drone
>>52082619
garbage times bro
Should be sub 10 seconds even with firmware.
>>52082668
>everything I've said regarding why I feel Systemd is objectively bad
>this retard comes away from it with this
I don't use BSD currently.
Systemd is a malware and botnet. Obscure in your actions.
And to top it off was created by the same creator of shit avahi-daemon, which was one of the most useless things created today, not forgetting the pulseaudio shit.
To summarize this guy is a shit programmer.
>>52078944
systemd is one of the best things to ever happen to Linux
>>52082725
Crowdfund a hitman to kill pottering?
>>52082725
>>52082744
top memeskis brehs
>>52082740
>xyz's impending demise is one of the best things to happen to xyz
>install ponyOS
>>52082586
may i ask what you mean by relevant distributions?
Let me ask you this....
How does systemd help the server market?, you know the main use for the gnu/linux os? it may be a well proposed idea for the desktop market, but lets face it.....
servers is where linux (any distribution) excells.
All dristos bare"relevance" because everyones needs are different.
>>52084293
as far as servers are concerned its the loss of architectural integrity of Linux.
>>52079631
whoops.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/2/420
>>52084853
forgot to mention that is systemd dev Kay Sievers banned from contributing to the linux kernel by Linus himself. Permanently im not sure.
>>52084853
Should of shown the beginning of it.
Systemd devs at their best.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/2/415
>>52085074
moar on it. check it.
https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=76935
you have to have slight mental illness to be a systemd dev
>>52085214
i was commenter 16 on that one.
Nah, just joking, i was.
>>52084853
420 blaze it
>>52085254
Bwahhhh ha ha comment 23!
(In reply to comment #31)
> (In reply to comment #24)
> > Systemd needs to be forked NOW.
> >
> > Linus explained it well already:
> >
> > Kay and Lennart: please just go away, disappear from the FOSS community, we
> > don't need you and your crap.
>
> Please cite that quote as I've not seen it on LKML and didn't find it with a
> quick search, so I'm interested in where else this topic is being discussed.
Linus Torvalds wrote:
+Paul Morgan I think what you (and others) seem to miss is that the systemd people made the "debug" option that we introduced not just do something - but do something useless that actively broke other peoples use of that option.
It doesn't matter who "owns" it, the fact is, they broke it.
Ok, fine. Bugs happen, and that's not what makes people upset.
What makes me (and others) upset is that when the bug is reported, with explanations and a suggestion for how to fix it, Kay just closed the bug-report, claiming it wasn't a bug.
Seriously? You want to debug kernel stuff, using the kernel command line command "debug" that makes the kernel more verbose, and now the systemd people say "sorry, we stole your thing and made it useless, and it's not a bug because you didn't call shot-gun".
Now, if this was an isolated incident, I personally would let it go. There are bad engineers out there, it's not worth worrying about. Ignore them and move on.
But this is not an isolated incident. This is how Kay has treated other bugs in the past. Literally months of stalling, closing bug-reports, and blaming other people and projects for problems that he caused, telling others how they should change their projects because he broke something, and obviously it can't be his fault.
And that is a problem.
>>52082502
i like you
I remember mandrake 10 in 2005 having colored "OK" startup messages like that, did Mandrake use systemd back then?
>>52078944
a)
Fork it, keep the good parts, replace the bad parts
b)
write a better alternative
>>52084853
>>52084918
>>52085074
>>52085214
>>52085254
>>52085288
>>52079631
--> >>52085675
Paided sysvinit/OpenRC shills and BSD fags on suicide watch.
>>52084293
Actually, systemd gives to servers a proper way of tracking, killing, daemonize and control processes properly.
Almost all older solutions depended of bad implement shit like inconsistent daemonization code in bash scripts, unreliable pid files, etc, etc.
>>52079098
systemd haters in one post
>>52079047
>>52079075
>>52079237
>>52079449
>>52079567
>>52079624
>>52079669
>>52079710
>>52079801
>>52079840
>>52080252
>>52080325
>>52080721
>>52080993
>>52081185
>>52081232
>>52081280
>>52081388
>>52081539
>>52081621
>>52081679
>>52081890
>>52081893
>>52084231
>>52085788
>>52079202
don't forget binary logs
>>52087579
you sound tense here , shill
>>52087712
>muh text logs
>implying that you don't tar them
>implying you can't redirect systemd-journald into rsyslog
Enjoy your tampering
>>52087732
I just want you people to fuck off to hotwheelschan, cancer-kun
>>52079449
>The shills are real
I'm worried it'll become the X11 and make it painful to migrate from the next greatest thing.
>>52087813
Lennart Poettering - A Saturated Grey - Hamburg University - Gymnasium Ohlstedt - Escola Corcovado
Finally, I have used systemd before (it broke my boot and I filed a bug on it), and I'm not an old greybeard who "can't keep up with the times" (I'm 22), and I don't dislike Lennart's software because I dislike him, I dislike his software because it seems bloated, ill-defined in its purpose, and tightly coupled (unnecessarily so).
>>52079047
systemd is a great project, but it should be in better hands.
>>52087946
And? Since the beginning there were people that liked the project but had problems with those behind it. Kay and Potts being some of the most well know faggots in the FOSS would doesn't help. systemd, like many other projects, has a story of problematic bugreports
>>52079123
i can tell you from an admin point of view. where I work we have over 2.3 k red hat 5 and 6 based servers mostly for several departments and teams. you have to know how the systems do what how in order to migrate to red hat 7. since some assholes don't maintain configs and scripts via puppet it is hard to know if they use certain services, such as syslog for logging or log forwarding, cron jobs, VIPs configs for ha clusters, init scripts and such.
migration is a pain because systemd is a "I can do anything" collection of software as one. it makes my work such a pain that I thought of switching to networking just so I don't have to deal with it.
it does not comply with the old LSB, it partially does not comply with audits because of permissions and such, and it is a single point of failure.
kpatch is actually useless because every god damn time your "init system" has another patch it needs rebooting to take effect.
the way it does things is sometimes not bad, such as build in cronjobs, but serial console or stty config is horrendous
>>52080335
literally kill yourself.
>>52080335
https://wiki.installgentoo.com/index.php/Common_Trolls_and_Copypasta#The_case_in_favor_of_systemd
