Systemd Rolls Out Its Own Mount Tool

[computerquip]

I can honestly see that systemd brings some good things to the table, and will continue to evolve. Its something Id definitely enjoy experimenting with, and develop things that integrate with it. Not a problem in the lab.

But, the big question is ... if I deployed something important on a production server TODAY, whats the chance that over the next 5 years, maintenance would be a breeze ? How many more "features" am I going to have to keep up with on this production system over the next 5 y.ears ... and how do I convince my customers that passing on the cost of doing this is in their interests ? This is not the fault of systemd at all ... its just the reality of doing business in the tech space.

My last couple of big deployments have been running on FreeBSD for this reason. (and ZFS as a big reason as well). I cant prove anything yet, but at least I "feel" that Im not going to have to radically re-engineer all the scripts and glue that keep the system running anytime soon, just because the base architecture has "evolved" beyond recognition, and adding new staff to the project in 5 years from now wont look at it in horror and see "Legacy System Architecture" written all over it.

Its not just systemd either ... there is a whole raft of container technology that looks great, but is moving at a fast pace. I would be concerned about deploying any of these things, without budgetting in a fairly significant cost over the life of the project to keep the sysadmin side up to date and relevant with the latest and greatest.

On the subject of Desktop Linux ... again, in the lab, we are all over the place, which is a good thing. For a stable workstation, we have standardised on PCLinuxOS with KDE .. which bucks the trend by not using systemd, and uses BFS scheduler as well. It has proven to be very stable and snappy over the last few years., makes for a great Workstation desktop.

Consider how RHEL works. They don't constantly update their releases with disruptive changes and only within RHEL 7 did they finally adopt systemd. That said, they will still support RHEL 6 for some time (we still don't even know when EOL is. It's sometime past the year 2020). While your concern is a valid one, it's easily put down when you realize how the enterprise Linux distributions handle their releases.

I mean, unless you use Arch Linux for your server... I don't really recommend it though.

[pjezek]

Nothing is the best today not to be better tomorrow... To prevent from suboptimality and system incopantivnity, reinventing a wheel from the scratch is a wise method. KISS is a free set of particular instruments, systemd tends to be a flexible and modular complex instrument. Better will be used in the world of wise people...

[curfew]

Nothing bad would happen either. It would block on trying to read the file from the directory - which itself would wait for it to be mounted. That's how autofs mounts work. Unfortunately, there would be no indication or notification that this is happening.

"Nothing bad", lol. I've had NFS mounts 'block' and in Gnome that means the whole fucking desktop might freeze, or all Nautilus instances at the very least. That's far from usable. Systemd would still block you at bootscreen to prevent other, more annoying and potentially dangerous side effects.

[edmon]

why develop systemd can't we just stole svchost from MS?

[aht0]

your memory is confusing systemd executable with systemd project. it is linux basesystem. just compare it with freebsd counterpart ffs and stop posting bullshit

Had some free days alone..
I installed FreeBSD11-RC1 on spare 5400rpm 500Gb 2,5" HDD. Just to avoid messing with boot loaders, resizing partitions etc. Easier with dedicated disk for simple tryout. After installing it (base system, sources and ports, nothing else, 5-6min), setting up X and KDE by hand after initial reboot (manual process which took roughly 15min, I used pkg_install and binary packages+entries I had to add into /etc/rc.conf) I rebooted. From FreeBSD boot loader prompt (where it starts 10 sec countdown and allows for switching to different kernel or boot into single user regime) I hit Enter to abort countdown, then clocked the length of the normal boot process. It took 17,5 seconds to bring up KDE login screen..

Latest OpenSuSe Leap.
Booting took 1:42 (because bunch of time something or the other had thumb up it's butt and timers on screen running measuring it) during FIRST boot on fresh install on exact same drive. Installing from DVD media took nearly 45min. I did not bother with manual package selection. Just KDE5 and what Novell thought I needed.. I did not do any fucking custom config that should be "wrong" because of my incompetence.

If it's faster then brushing my teeth trough butt is also more efficient.. Granted, FreeBSD is slimmer and faster boot came purely from having to start up less stuff and read less data from disk even when it was linear process using old init.. If I had spent a hour and done custom install of OpenSUSE I could have more than likely beaten FreeBSD boot time handily.. Just because of omitting all that extraneous crap distributor thinks you just MUST have with default install.. As it is, it does not matter..

[stefansaraev]

I'm a Linux developer, involved one way or another in many projects. Could you tell me how does systemd make my life easier?!

I am a linux developer, packager, and a distro maintainer.

systemd makes my life easier both as a developer, and as a user.

technical discusion about pros and cons ended long time ago, anti-systemd haters still can't accept a simple fact that it's good for eveyone (no, it's not redhat conspiracy, take your tinfoil hats off)

too much bull**** in this forum. eh.

[whitecat]

and orange is blue. wtf is wrong with people.

Orange is obviously not blue, and so aren't init and system words.
initd = init daemon
systemd = system daemon
I don't know whats you are not understanding in "system daemon" words. It's quite explicit that's more than an init system. systemd never changed its name. It was never being named "initngd".

So you are saying it didn't start as a replacement for the init system? [...] but if it is not true then what is it?

well some trivial wayback machine search tells me that far far back (2010) the systemd website[1] linked to a blog post from Lennart himself [2] descibing how systemd came to be, and there it calls talks about systemd (and I quote): "This blog story is long, so even though I can only recommend reading the long story, here's the one sentence summary: we are experimenting with a new init system and it is fun."

so it is quite evident that it started as a new ( and so modern, since i dout the aim was to make it legacy style from the get go) init system replacement (since there cannot be 2 init's on a single system, or at least they cannot run simulaneously) what it became after that is history

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20100724...ftware/systemd
[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20100528...s/systemd.html

Quoted from these links:
- systemd is a system and session manager for Linux
- systemd starts up and supervises the entire system (hence the name...)
- It implements all of the features pointed out above and a few more
- More importantly however, it is also our plan to experiment with systemd not only for optimizing boot times, but also to make it the ideal session manager, to replace (or possibly just augment) gnome-session, kdeinit and similar daemons.


So don't tell systemd was just an initd replacement. From the beginning it had a larger scope in mind.

[whitecat]

By homogenization it vastly increases the insecurity of Linux - since an exploit on one distro, will work on all...

Security through diversity, security through obscurity: same principle.

[rtfazeberdee]

Hi yall & starshipeleven,

<snip>
Which isn't a problem unless you are a very very hardcore feminist, which would usually require you to also be a female as I've never seen very very hardcore male feminists. If that is the case I'm invoking the Internet rule "Tits or GTFO", so show me your tits or go away.
<snip>

Yep man, real deep. What was said above, 15year old white males...?

Which leaves us with Feature Creep, Insecure, breaks Unix.

GreekGeek.

Post something with content instead of trolling, stefansaraev has already wiped you off the board with facts and content.

[Guest]

I have no problem at all with systemd continually adding features but why not just build upon libmount?