Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 84

Thread: Lennart Poettering Takes To Battling Systemd Myths

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,330

    Default Lennart Poettering Takes To Battling Systemd Myths

    Phoronix: Lennart Poettering Takes To Battling Systemd Myths

    Lennart Poettering, the controversial open-source developer behind PulseAudio and systemd among other projects, has written a lengthy blog post as he attempts to battle some myths about his Linux init daemon...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTI4NDc

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    32

    Default

    systemd is good, but it is not completely ready yet. Take systemd's user instances: from what I understand, it should be possible to run a user's services/sockets even when he doesn't log in when he is enabled via "loginctl enable-linger $username". But there are currently scripts provided to do that (user-session-units) because lingering doesn't seem to work. When you try to start a systemd user instance on a headless machine, you get errors because the display variable is not set, might be a dbus issue, but user-session-units has a service file that works around that. So, from my impressions, it is not feature-complete yet. Not a biggie though as it already handles much more than any init system I ever saw and makes administration really easy IMHO. TBH, I dunno why you would want to go back to a classic syslog with all the comfort journalctl provides. Or managing your startup dependencies yourself.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,988

    Default

    *grabs some popcorn*

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,004

    Default Dependency

    Didn't mention that systemd is closely tied to udev and journald and that there is a dependency there and people are forced to use it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Didn't mention that systemd is closely tied to udev and journald and that there is a dependency there and people are forced to use it.
    Standalone udev is supported and he did mention that in the blog post. Nothing depends on Journal so how would that "force" anyone to use systemd?

    In fact, many of these binaries[1] are separated out so nicely, that they are very useful outside of systemd, too. -- [1] For example, systemd-detect-virt, systemd-tmpfiles, systemd-udevd are.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Barcelona
    Posts
    74

    Default

    That guy screwed up udev.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Didn't mention that systemd is closely tied to udev and journald and that there is a dependency there and people are forced to use it.
    systemd depends on udev and journal.
    journal depends on systemd
    udev depends on....the kernel.

    End of dependencies. If you want to build udev, yes, you have to pull in the systemd sources BUT you dont have to build systemd with udev. Just pass the appropriate configure flag and the only thing you'll have is udev.

    The journal is only force-enabled, yes, but it doesn't take exclusive access. I have both journald and syslog running right now on this Arch Laptop. You know what I had to do?

    pacman -S syslog-ng
    systemctl enable syslog-ng
    systemctl start syslog-ng

    And thats it. Anything that gets sent to the journal is automatically (with zero configuration on my end) passed along to syslog. If you dont want to use the journal than you just dont invoke journalctl and you just cat the log files from /var/log like always.


    I know someone will make the comment about Lennart saying he wanted to eventually get rid of udev-without-systemd. Yes, he made the comment, you know what the key-word there is though? "EVENTUALLY." He didn't say "2013." He didn't say "Next release." Or anything else. He said eventually. Which I don't really see that as that big of a problem, its only natural that a project leader would want his project to grow and be successful. (Un)Fortunately there can only be 1 init system in place at any given time on one machine so systemd being ultimately successful and being the standard -would- mean, logically, that sysV and upstart die.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    I wonder what this guy is smoking.

    This has to be the most shittiest things I've ever read about systemd or any project, WTF?

    Hey Lennart, are you going to merge Qt also? and Emacs? and Xorg, etc?

    WTF.

    What a crappy way of managing a project.
    He's actually right. Go look at the Net/Open/Free BSD's source. The kernel and the low-level utilities aren't shared, each group has their own kernel and their own low-level utilities that take the best features that their individual kernels offers and uses them. The middle tier, like ssh, and the higher tier like xorg are shared sure. But the low-level stuff? Group-specific.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,859

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    Yeah and? Just because that's how it's done in BSD land it means it's the "right and only way" to do things, and it needs to happen the same way in Linux too?

    Give me a break.
    Didn't say it was the right way necessarily (Though I do PERSONALLY think that it is. We have the features available in the kernel, may as well use them.)

    I was just pointing out that if Net/Free/Open BSD want to maintain that they are true unix and that their way is the true unix way....if Linux does something the same way as them, then isnt Linux by extension following the true unix way?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,258

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by asdx View Post
    Hey Lennart, are you going to merge Qt also? and Emacs? and Xorg, etc?
    How did you get that impression out of the material you quoted? Basically, Lennart is saying that systemd is not controlled by one czar and development is more collaborative than Linux.

    I wonder what this guy is smoking.
    The same thought occurred to me... (about you).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •