Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Systemd Dreams Up New Feature, Makes It Like Cron

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
    Show me that with compiling one of its main components, udev, without compiling systemd. Oh wait, there goes the modularity.
    The systemd build system makes the (controversial?) assumption that you are trying to build systemd. That's why there is no switch to switch off systemd compilation (nor its hard dependencies like journald and udevd). However, that does not mean the code is not modular. Just use your own makefile.

    If that's too much work, then take LFS's (I believe LFS, unlike eudev, does exactly the right thing to support building udev without systemd): http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/s...-197-2.tar.bz2. Extract that tarball in the systemd sources and now you can install udev just fine using:

    make -f udev-lfs-197-2/Makefile.lfs install udev
    make -f udev-lfs-197-2/Makefile.lfs udev

    HTH,

    Tom

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
      Show me that with compiling one of its main components, udev, without compiling systemd. Oh wait, there goes the modularity.
      The systemd build system is made to build systemd (together with its hard dependencies and any subsets of its optional dependencies).

      If you want to build something else, you can either do "make XYZ" manually for the files you want, or just write your own Makefile.

      If that is too much hassle, I recommend trying LFS's Makefile if that's what you want. They are, IMNSHO, doing the right thing in order to support building udev without building systemd (unlike eudev).

      Download: http://anduin.linuxfromscratch.org/s...-197-2.tar.bz2

      Extract into systemd sources.

      # make -f udev-lfs-197-2/Makefile.lfs udev
      # make -f udev-lfs-197-2/Makefile.lfs install udev

      Comment


      • I wonder what’s stopping Poettering from reimplementing the kernel in systemd…

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
          Show me that with compiling one of its main components, udev, without compiling systemd. Oh wait, there goes the modularity.
          Its only "there goes the modularity" because systemd has a hard dependency on udev. BUT its not the other way around. Compile systemctl, journactl, and udev together and just copy-paste out udev. Or write your own makefile that only compiles udev.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by sjukfan View Post
            Also... really... boot up time? How often do you boot your computers? I reboot once a months, less on servers, so that's not really a must have function for me.
            As Lennart, and I, and many others have said many times... faster boot times weren't the goal of systemd they are just a side effect of doing things correctly. By letting systemd handle dependencies instead of making the package (like upstart and openrc do), by using .socket files, and by buffering input to depended-on services until they are actually ready

            Comment


            • Originally posted by sjukfan View Post
              Also... really... boot up time? How often do you boot your computers? I reboot once a months, less on servers, so that's not really a must have function for me.
              Usually I reboot my main PC twice a day. I like that clean RAM and low energy bill, thank you very much.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                As Lennart, and I, and many others have said many times... faster boot times weren't the goal of systemd they are just a side effect of doing things correctly. By letting systemd handle dependencies instead of making the package (like upstart and openrc do), by using .socket files, and by buffering input to depended-on services until they are actually ready
                Boot time is what most people mention when they talk about systemd, and I assume no one changes to it just because of the Plymouth integration. http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/why.html

                Comment


                • *sigh* And yet there is still no way to neatly run a scheduled job on the last day of the month. Honestly, if you're going to write a cron replacement, you may as well make improvements to it.

                  Currently, if I need to do this, I specify the process to run on the 28th - 31st of every month, and include this shell test before the job command: [ `perl -e 'print ((localtime(time+86400))[3])'` -eq 1 ] &&

                  It works, but I'd much rather have a built in solution to the cron replacement.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                    Its only "there goes the modularity" because systemd has a hard dependency on udev. BUT its not the other way around. Compile systemctl, journactl, and udev together and just copy-paste out udev. Or write your own makefile that only compiles udev.
                    So it is only modular if it comes to systemd, not when it comes to compile the udev component, which is still used by many other distribution without systemd.
                    So those distributions are punished with extra development time (for their own Makefiles) or extra work when maintaining their udev package (longer build time with more build dependencies, the hassle to copy out the udev files) or even the work to fork it, but still people are saying that there is no force towards systemd when you don't want to use it. Man, there were volunteers on the mailing list that wanted to do the work to implement the option to build udev without systemd, but the developers don't want it. But there is no force towards systemd.

                    Man, your reality must be somewhat distorted.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by DeeK View Post
                      *sigh* And yet there is still no way to neatly run a scheduled job on the last day of the month. Honestly, if you're going to write a cron replacement, you may as well make improvements to it.

                      Currently, if I need to do this, I specify the process to run on the 28th - 31st of every month, and include this shell test before the job command: [ `perl -e 'print ((localtime(time+86400))[3])'` -eq 1 ] &&

                      It works, but I'd much rather have a built in solution to the cron replacement.
                      Does not sound entirely unreasonable. I'd suggest making a feature request on the systemd mailinglist. I suppose what you want is the posibility of using negative values in timestamps (i.e., the -1'st day of the month, and so on wherever it makes sense). I didn't think about it carefully, but prefixing the value by '-' should work (i.e., I don't think it classes with the range operator which is also '-'), but it might be very confusing to the user, so maybe something better is needed.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                        So it is only modular if it comes to systemd, not when it comes to compile the udev component, which is still used by many other distribution without systemd.
                        So those distributions are punished with extra development time (for their own Makefiles) or extra work when maintaining their udev package (longer build time with more build dependencies, the hassle to copy out the udev files) or even the work to fork it, but still people are saying that there is no force towards systemd when you don't want to use it. Man, there were volunteers on the mailing list that wanted to do the work to implement the option to build udev without systemd, but the developers don't want it. But there is no force towards systemd.

                        Man, your reality must be somewhat distorted.
                        Its 1 time expense of extra work-- the time needed to write the makefile ONE TIME. And if youre really lazy you dont even have to write it once since LFS was nice enough to publish their makefile.

                        As far as build dependencies... a minimal systemd build (which one would be doing if they just wanted udev) has 3 makedeps. 1) dbus, 2) glibc 3)libcap. All of which would already be installed on the system more than likely so youre issue of "More build dependencies" is BS rigtht there.

                        The patches for udev-only? http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linu...ug.devel/17478 the developers had problems with the patches submitted and the discussion eventually died off. Want the patches? There ya go, resubmit them for inclusion to systemd-dev.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Ericg View Post
                          Its 1 time expense of extra work-- the time needed to write the makefile ONE TIME. And if youre really lazy you dont even have to write it once since LFS was nice enough to publish their makefile.
                          Once per every systemd release, not ONE TIME [sic].

                          As far as build dependencies... a minimal systemd build (which one would be doing if they just wanted udev) has 3 makedeps. 1) dbus, 2) glibc 3)libcap. All of which would already be installed on the system more than likely so youre issue of "More build dependencies" is BS rigtht there.
                          Nope. D-bus and libcap have no place on my systems, they are bloat. D-bus is actually absolutely crap in addition, libcap is merely bloat. I suppose people not wanting to use glibc don't exist either.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by uid313 View Post
                            I never hear anyone bitch about Ubuntu's Upstart, Apple's launchd, or OpenRC.

                            People only seem to be bitching about systemd.
                            Maybe there is a reason?
                            Reason: Linux users are whiny bitches who gladly download and use _free_ stuff that other people worked their asses off on and then rarely contribute back anything besides more whining and bitching.

                            There was tons of Linux users whining about Upstart at first. It broke stuff. Then it matured. Same as systemd. Less whining about launchd, but then OSX users don't whine and bitch like Linux users. Nobody does.

                            All the major systemd complaints are from non-users of systemd. They whine because they can, not because they have any real reason to. Par for the course in Linux land. Constant gobs of "stop energy" and armchair programmers giving their unsolicited, unwelcome, idiotic opinions on what they think good software looks like.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                              Reason: Linux users are whiny bitches who gladly download and use _free_ stuff that other people worked their asses off on and then rarely contribute back anything besides more whining and bitching.

                              There was tons of Linux users whining about Upstart at first. It broke stuff. Then it matured. Same as systemd. Less whining about launchd, but then OSX users don't whine and bitch like Linux users. Nobody does.

                              All the major systemd complaints are from non-users of systemd. They whine because they can, not because they have any real reason to. Par for the course in Linux land. Constant gobs of "stop energy" and armchair programmers giving their unsolicited, unwelcome, idiotic opinions on what they think good software looks like.
                              You have never posted a single positive thing about Linux on this forum, and now you're criticizing others?

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                                Reason: Linux users are whiny bitches who gladly download and use _free_ stuff that other people worked their asses off on and then rarely contribute back anything besides more whining and bitching.
                                Funny thing, that. So, you claim Linux users are cheap and never want to pay for anything... ok, whatever you say. But hey, let's look at the latest Humble Indie Bundle:

                                https://www.humblebundle.com/

                                Average purchase: $6.70
                                Average Windows: $6.23
                                Average Mac: $7.95
                                Average Linux: $10.47

                                Hey, look at that. Looks like it's the Mac & Windows users who are the cheapskates. Linux users? They're willing to pay for quality stuff, when the merchandise is offered on terms that are fair and not covered in EULAs and DRM. I guess Mac and Windows guys already pay so much for their operating systems they have no more money left for other things... eh?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X