Systemd is pretty cool honestly
I don't hate systemd, but I prefer OpenRC and usually use it on my Debian systems. My preference is purely vibes based though, and I think most of the anti-systemd arguments in common usage are a bit silly.
My biggest problem with systemd is that Red Hat has basically used it to push their-way-or-the-highway on many Linux distros. That said, in many situations systemd is better than what came before. Except systemd-networkd. It's a PITA as far as I'm concerned.
I see why that may not be an ideal position in an ideological sense, where every distro uses the same thing, but i see it the other way around: it's a way to finally attempt to standardize Linux desktops. Having a standard desktop is crucial for mainstream adoption, because developers won't bother supporting 4837 different combinations of software. This is the reason I am really excited for the future with flatpak, xdg-portals, systemd, pipewire, Wayland etc etc. This way the distro is no longer the platform, it's the distro agnostic software stack that becomes the target platform. For example there's no longer a need to support KDE's file picker, and gnome's file picker and xfce's, you can just call the portal and it will (should) display a file picker. And if the user doesn't have a supported environment (which the vast majority don't) then the burden is on them for being different I guess :p
I like the standardisation of things. I don't like that it's glomming over everything to push Red Hat's way of doing it and slow-walking proposals from other groups.
The Nix package manager uses systemd for instatiating services for its packages, so you can switch between any setup with one command. Nix will stop and start all the units that were changed. While it's a Nix feature, systemd is doing all the heavy lifting
systemd-network is great on servers. I use it on every machine that isn't on wifi
What are your issues with networkd?
I find it hard to deal with. I generally end up writing a new plan file and just rendering that to networkd.
My thoughts on systemd:
It's one of the init systems of all time.
it makes my computer start. that’s pretty neat I think
I like the way I can make the timeout 0 so I don't even need to think about it doing its job :)
SystemD works great, but the corporations and politics behind it will ruin Linux if they fully take over. They are already optimizing heavily for IoT just because IBM is heavily focused on IoT
I'm pretty sure IBM hasn't focussed on IoT in a long time
(In the sense that I used to work there and know they've both reduced investment in, and fully removed, some parts of their portfolio regarding IoT)
Just search IBM IoT and look at IBM acquisitions in the last decade.
Everyone "used to work for that company" on the internet. And even if you used to work there it doesn't mean you know anything about their business. IBM is more of a Holding now. Like Volkswagen. Just because someone works at audi it doesn't mean they know anything about Lamborghini.
https://unixdigest.com/articles/the-real-motivation-behind-systemd.html
I'm well aware of IBM IoT and their acquisitions, but I'm also aware that most of that stuff happened around 2016-2018, and since then that part of the business has been shrunk down and sold off.
Believe what you want. I did work in IBM IoT, but what do I know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If you read your own article, you'll also notice that it doesn't mention IoT even once. It talks about embedded use cases, which is not the same as IoT. Are you sure you're not just throwing together unrelated topics?
IBM is heavily focused on IoT
Oh no, IBM wants to put a System/390 in every lightbulb!
So, back to incandescent bulbs? Because the overheated processor will generate more light than the LED.
IBM's revolutionary lighting and home heating device.
You had me at "declarative".
Would you elaborate? Is systemd config not declarative?
It is. The cracker in the second panel lists several benefits of systemd, including declarative config.
They're saying it is, and they like it because it is.
Its a meme phrase.
Ahh thanks, my English is not so sharp.
journalctl and binary logging are annoying bullshit.
Amen.
Anyone got a good tutorial/guide fir SystemD?
Figure I may as well try to wrap my head around it if it's supposedly going to murder me in my sleep or whatever.
Man pages
And if you're not a 50 year-old Linux admin, Arch wiki.
Edit: don't be put off by the Arch wiki if you don't use Arch. 99% of the time, Linux is Linux, and you can follow it for just about anything other than package management.
That too but arch wiki sometimes doesn't list all the possibilities the program can do or not, skill issue if you can't read.
skill issue
I fully own that. But I like the logical ordering of the page sections on the wiki, and if anything is unclear or info is missing there--which it is pretty rare--I'll hit up man in desperation
@pewgar_seemsimandroid systemd has a lot of really good things...
But it's too complex for init process and even too complex for service manager. Many solib dependencies causes long start, big memory footprint and possibe security issues. Many things might be implemented in some separate services, running with restricted permissions and optionally disabled.
initng was very similar to systemd, but was very simple and very much faster
runit entering the chat
I dislike journalctl more than systemd. And I don't get what's the advantage of systemctl vs previous solutions, why would that of all things make one reconsider.
I miss rc.local and crontabs. Now if you excuse me I have a cloud to yell at.
The only advantage I see is that it actually seems to keep a better handle on the status of the process/service. The old-style unit scripts would often get out of sync and not realize that a process had died, or if they did they would repeatedly respawn a service that would just die again. Maybe that was less of a problem in later years than I experienced earlier, but it was there.
The whole init.d system felt very ad-hoc with every script working a little bit differently, giving different output styles, etc.
Fair enough.
I've used both runnit and systemD and I prefer systemD. Nothing against runnit and I love Void Linux.
{insert IBM conspiracy here}
The Nazis will overtake us, one red hat at a time
Well, I think that if declarative configuration is what you're looking for, the GNU Guix distro with its GNU Shepherd init system might be a more pertinent solution than SystemD
Hell yea +1 for shepherd.
Declarativity on steroids.
Aren't all configs declarative?
some other init systems just use scripts for config, meaning you can just do whatever
Configs can do whatever too.
a config file can do only what the program that reads it allows. if the program that reads the file is just bash...
Limits and constraints are set by the program that reads the config, so no, not whatever. The only way that is a thing, if the program stated that the configs can do whatever, which at that point, is a script.
Also if a config can do what ever, then most likely that's a security vulnerability.
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't remove France.