systemd Rolling Out "run0" As sudo Alternative

[L_A_G]

You gotta be trolling.

No, I've just got this thing called "reading comprehension" that I'd recommend you brush up on.

I call it functionally monolithic because the dependencies across the technically modular parts means that large parts of it are such that you can't use them unless you also use a bunch more. If you want to use "A", it's going to have hard dependencies on "B" and "C" so unless you're already using them, you're going to have to pull them in too.

Your "Works fine on my machine" nonsense was because you were already using the parts of it that those things you picked up and dropped had hard dependencies with.

[L_A_G]

Based on your link...

When people post links you should probably go read them instead of just letting your imagination tell you what it says. If you read the link you'd see that the issue is that if you use any little bit of it, you have to pull in loads more of it because those little bits have hard dependencies on them. There'd be no issue if you could pull in these bits one-by-one, but when they get linked together like beads on a string that's an issue.

Sure you can ignore it like you can ignore climate change, political polarization, a failing marriage and your children. But ignoring it doesn't make it any less of an issue.

[jacob]

Google with migrating server from redhat based to debian without stopping them did a serous abomination back in the day. So yes it would be possible to put fedora DNF on Ubuntu/Debian or Arch if you are willing to-do many highly risk/dangerous things and get it to work..

https://www.usenix.org/conference/lisa13/technical-sessions/presentation/merlin

Yes this 2013 thing is a demo option number 3 for mass system upgrade or then o hell I don't want to ever have to-do that nightmare if I can avoid it option. This nightmare method would allow DNF on Ubuntu, Debian or Arch.

Wow, I never heard of it. That's seriously f'ed up.

[Artim]

systemd is cancer which turn Linux into M$ BSD zombie.

Please stop spreading lies

[onlyLinuxLuvUBack]

I call it functionally monolithic because the dependencies across the technically modular parts means that large parts of it are such that you can't use them unless you also use a bunch more. If you want to use "A", it's going to have hard dependencies on "B" and "C" so unless you're already using them, you're going to have to pull them in too.
.

All Hail Anti-X debian stable !

[access]

When people post links you should probably go read them instead of just letting your imagination tell you what it says. If you read the link you'd see that the issue is that if you use any little bit of it, you have to pull in loads more of it because those little bits have hard dependencies on them. There'd be no issue if you could pull in these bits one-by-one, but when they get linked together like beads on a string that's an issue.

Sure you can ignore it like you can ignore climate change, political polarization, a failing marriage and your children. But ignoring it doesn't make it any less of an issue.

The first three packages listed don't exist anymore... or at least the links are broken. Then there is some GNOME stuff and GNOME is heavily dependant on systemd as is, dbus-broker is created by a systemd developer so no surprise that they would use systemd functionality and lastly there is a shell script utility that is built around systemd timers...

So I don't really know what you want to say with your link. That software that is explicitly built to depend on systemd depends on systemd or that Gentoo's packagages have bugs and don't have enough meta indirection so that the whole systemd shebang is not pulled.*

Neither of those things can be blamed on systemd though.


*) E.g. psd on debian doesn't have a hard dep on systemd

[kevlar700]

I don't understand why there's so much hatred against systemd. There's nothing or nobody forcing you to use a specific feature. There's alternatives for those that don't want to use systemd explicitly, but I'm actually a Gentoo user with systemd, because everything just integrates better and makes my life easier, but that doesn't mean I'm using everything.
- I'm not using systemd-boot, but I'm using grub, because that's more convenient for me;
- I'm not using systemd-networkd as I also found it to be too unstable, so I just disabled it and switched to NetworkManager on my desktop and laptop
- I'm using systemd-homed on one of my computers, as it's easier in that specific USE case, yet I'm using systemd-cryptenroll (yet I could also just choose to use cryptsetup) for another system with my Yubikey.
- I'll likely not be using systemd-run0 as my system is fully built upon and mostly uses sudo (including scripts)

I'd be free to use openRC too and develop my own alternatives.

All of the above is my personal choice and no-one else's.

I also understand why they're picking 1 standard to support from a developers perspective, as developer resources are limited (sometimes even scarce) and this lightens the burden on developers to support multiple standards and that choice happens to be systemd.

I found OpenRC far more intuitive to use on Gentoo. The problem is Unix is supposed to be about doing one thing well. Competition makes those tools great. Systemd used various tactics such as stating that popular projects like Gnome needed systemd and consolekit was broken on purpose (they even discussed pushing people to use systemd). Unit files were written for Debian before any competition was considered so that by the time a vote was had. The question was basically do you devs want more work to do or not and not which init system is best. SystemV was bad. Systemd is a bit better but still not intuitive. OpenBSDs simple rc system is a breath of fresh air in comparison that requires almost no documentation and/or fiddling. Even systemctl status default output isn't very good at all.

[Sonadow]

Not even that. The package manager is set by your distro. You can't install say Fedora's DNF on Ubuntu, Debian or Arch and expect it to work.

You do have a choice of distros / OSes, that's it. If for some reason you (rhetorical you) can't stand apt or dnf, or systemd, select your distro accordingly. If you can't stand the Linux kernel, use BSD or Windows. Seriously, I expect that next, those people will start moaning that Linux takes away their precious Freedom of Choice (tm) because they have decided to replace the kernel in their amd64 Fedora with an OpenBSD kernel compiled for ARM and it's a scandal that it doesn't work.

That's why I use Windows most of the time.

The only things I like about Linux are its performance, zero $ cost and how packages can be extracted to a path somewhere in $HOME and run independently without writing to the software installation database or tying themselves to apt or dnf. Everything else, from its filesystem layout to the whole "all libraries must be shared by everybody as much as possible" mantra drives me nuts and makes it near impossible to have side-by-side installations of many things because they all dump themselves into /usr/bin and /usr/lib/

On the other hand, while I really, really cannot stand Windows' performance in comparison to Linux and totally dislike how almost every software package is shipped as an installer .exe or .msi with no way to extract and run the bundled programs independently, their filesystem layout is so much, much more sane and side-by-side installation of many things are possible. Also helps that their kernel and Windows ABI is stable enough that most drivers and programs from Windows X -2 can still install and run Windows X. In some times, even Vista and 7-era drivers and software might still work. That's more than two decades of compatibility. Don't be surprised to be Oracle 11g running on Windows Server 2019 even in 2024.

[jacob]

That's why I use Windows most of the time.

The only things I like about Linux are its performance, zero $ cost and how packages can be extracted to a path somewhere in $HOME and run independently without writing to the software installation database or tying themselves to apt or dnf. Everything else, from its filesystem layout to the whole "all libraries must be shared by everybody as much as possible" mantra drives me nuts and makes it near impossible to have side-by-side installations of many things because they all dump themselves into /usr/bin and /usr/lib/

On the other hand, while I really, really cannot stand Windows' performance in comparison to Linux and totally dislike how almost every software package is shipped as an installer .exe or .msi with no way to extract and run the bundled programs independently, their filesystem layout is so much, much more sane and side-by-side installation of many things are possible. Also helps that their kernel and Windows ABI is stable enough that most drivers and programs from Windows X -2 can still install and run Windows X. In some times, even Vista and 7-era drivers and software might still work. That's more than two decades of compatibility. Don't be surprised to be Oracle 11g running on Windows Server 2019 even in 2024.

I see it differently. The default filesystem layout is retarded for sure (it did make sense... in 1972's computing landscape) but flatpak, snap and docker/podman largely solve all of the issues that you mention. Of course there are vocal haters that won't stop trolling about how that's not the real Uneeeeeeex Pheeeelosopheeeee and that Real Men use "make install". But that is just an example of my personal belief that what's holding Linux back is not a technical problem but a people problem. The lack of a stable kernel ABI on Linux is a PITA for developers and power-users who always want to update to the latest drivers without waiting for their distro to support them. But I accept that the kernel devs don't want the (considerable) burden of having to maintain it, and the general policy of encouraging driver developers to mainline their drivers is actually a sensible one.

The main reason I can't stand Windows and refuse to use it is its infinite spyware-ness and the general feel that whatever I try to do, Windows is fighting very, very hard to force me into something else. You want to install some tool? Unless you are VERY careful about all the minuscule and deliberately obfuscated options in the installer, you will get a truckload of unrelated showelvare, demo versions and other garbage with it. You want to install Firefox? It will try its worst to redirect you towards Edge or Chrome, and if you insist, it will revert the default browser to Edge anyway at the next upgrade. You paid good money for your OS? Doesn't matter, when you install it, one of the first things it asks you is how you want it to handle your "advertising ID". Paid adware, now that's something else. And don't get me started about One Drive which must surely be the single worst and most unusable piece of software ever. It goes on and on.

[kevlar700]

I use systemd-networkd on servers and desktop computers and I'm happy with it for this usage.
On laptops I'm still using Network-Manager because systemd-networkd doesn't support VPN the way I need it to.

I don't have issues with systemd-resolved and I'm happy to have the split dns feature. I didn't face issues where it randomly stops resolving domains, or if it happened I wasn't using the machine and it fixed itself.

On a pcengines apu with igbt (intel gigabit) on ubuntu server 22.04. I had to switch to network manager because systend-networkd constantly power cycled the port. I assumed at first that it must be a driver issue because in all my years I have never seen such a disruptive behaviour.