• Tja@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • Hawke@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

  • somegeek@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 days ago

    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

    • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      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)

      • somegeek@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        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

        • FooBarrington@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          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?

  • mittorn@masturbated.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    @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

  • SavvyWolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    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.

      • probably2high@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        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.

        • vinyl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

          • probably2high@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            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

  • afb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    2 days ago

    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.

    • lengau@midwest.social
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      2 days ago

      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.

      • Pasta Dental@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        2 days ago

        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

        • lengau@midwest.social
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 days ago

          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.

        • iopq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          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

        • lengau@midwest.social
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          I find it hard to deal with. I generally end up writing a new plan file and just rendering that to networkd.

  • trevor
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    2 days ago

    journalctl and binary logging are annoying bullshit.

  • daggermoon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’ve used both runnit and systemD and I prefer systemD. Nothing against runnit and I love Void Linux.

  • neox_@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    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

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      2 days ago

      some other init systems just use scripts for config, meaning you can just do whatever

        • vinyl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 day ago

          a config file can do only what the program that reads it allows. if the program that reads the file is just bash…