• forestbeasts@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      systemd used to be just an init system.

      It’d actually be pretty good, if it stuck to just being an init system!

      But noooo. Now it does DNS resolution. Network management. NTP time sync. They basically bought out udev and folded it into systemd, somehow. Login session management. A fucking BOOTLOADER.

      It’s too much power to give to one project.

      You uninstall systemd, half your system breaks and you suddenly have to relearn a bunch of crap all at once if you were using the systemd things for them before.

      Oh, and did I mention that anyone using or talking about non-systemd methods of doing things tends to get painted as “oh that’s OLD and OUTDATED and OBSOLETE, just use the systemd way it’s Modern™ and good”? That’s a thing too. See: cron and systemd timers (oh yeah, they have a cron replacement now too for some reason).

      – Frost

      • Tobias Hunger@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Systemd said on its first website that its a system management daemon. That is where the name came from. It was never supposed to be just an init system.

        No need to buy out udevd, considering the guy doing that was on board with systemd from the start and made sure that systemd-init can make maximum use of udev and the other way around… you typically do want to start stuff in response to hardware appearing and disappearing. Now they can do that safely by just asking systemd-init to manage the services. They needed to run stuff thenselves before, which pretty often ended up blocking the udev daemon from recognizing new events… a quality of live improvement for everybody involved:-)

        The rest has similar stories (only run network services when the network is up, start services only after the system clock has a sane value over starting the service and then adjusting the time at some later point (which some services handle really poorly), … . There are some damn good reasons for the stuff systemd does. That bootloader is a pretty central piece in the image by the way.

        Oh, and did I mention that anyone using or talking about non-systemd methods of doing things tends to get painted as “oh that’s OLD and OUTDATED and OBSOLETE, just use the systemd way it’s Modern™ and good”?

        That is pretty much the only thing I can agree with:-) And that is because the systemd ways are ofentimes way more robust and able to deal with corner cases way better.

    • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 days ago

      As I understand, one point is that systemd contradicts with its completeness the Unix philosophy of KISS, small tools that serve only one specific task.
      The other point is that the main developer, Lennart Poettering, is employed by “big tech”, now Microsoft (before: Red Hat) and thus has switched to the “evil site”.

      • garbage_world@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 days ago

        Why don’t they hate GNU then?

        I understand you aren’t one of them, but systemd is not a monolith.

        Also, what’s so special with UNIX philosophy.

        I hope they also hate proton, all browsers and the kernel, since those are also developed with help or by big tech

        • nyan@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 days ago

          systemd is a monolith in practice, despite what its advocates like to claim. You can’t run just a part of it under another init without doing extra patch-up work (see elogind). Whereas you can run just one GNU utility on top of, or even alongside, someone else’s implementation of that or other utilities (for instance, in parallel with a rust implementation that isn’t quite ready for the big time yet).

          systemd also won’t work on anything except Linux. Older solutions also worked on BSD. That matters to some people.

          And the issue was never just Poettering’s employers. He had a bad reputation in parts of the Linux community long before systemd—he was also the main force behind pulseaudio, which was shipped long before it was ready for actual use in the real world and remained in a semi-broken state for quite a long time afterwards. And he often comes across as personally obnoxious. Nothing like telling someone “I’m not interested in fixing your issues with my project” (except less politely) to get them to adopt your code.

          • Tobias Hunger@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            Either you build a tool that works well with one OS or you build one that works poorly with several.

            And it is not as if those other OSes are waiting for new cross-OS init tools: They either seem to be happy with what they got or want something tailored to their own features.