Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Debian To Switch To Systemd Or Upstart

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

  • Originally posted by Pajn View Post
    Is it possible to see where they are heading and what arguments are brought up?
    Although I don't like SystemD because of its monolithic model it would be very
    interesting to see technical arguments by a group that tries to be neutral.
    Not that I am aware of. There is of course the debate page, but the arguments there are written by the proponents of the init systems, so that isn't neutral at all.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
      Not that I am aware of. There is of course the debate page, but the arguments there are written by the proponents of the init systems, so that isn't neutral at all.
      Sad, I have read the debate page and that is just worthless.
      Upstart:
      Upstart is the best because it isn't SystemD

      SystemD:
      SystemD is the best because it isn't Upstart

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Ibidem View Post
        Assuming that (1) systemd doesn't push that up by a couple versions within the next year or so (which would be a quite reasonable pace); (2) systemd can be relied on to not drop support for kernels that are ~3 years old; and (3) that Debian doesn't care about users who needed a kernel that was 3 releases older.

        Systemd changes too fast for Debian, IMHO. 2 kernel releases is too little safety, and for Raspian that's actually 1 kernel release (they use 3.1.x).
        And there are people asking about using Jessie with 2.6.32, which is _currently_ supported.
        As stated at the link you provided:

        There have been transitions in the past (such as udev) where the dist-upgrade should be performed as:
        * Update sources.list
        * Install new kernel and new udev
        * Reboot
        * Proceed with dist-upgrade
        They are referring to the upgrade from lenny to squeeze. So an in-place upgrade would be nice, but was not always possible in the past. As for 2.6.32, well, you really can't expect debian to support kernels from two releases ago, considering it was not always possible to support the kernel from the last release. And if you want to keep the in-place upgrade support and systemd -- for whatever reason -- decides to increase the minimal kernel requirement, you can always stick to an older version of systemd for the next release. However, considering that the first release of systemd was only in April 2010, it's not safe to extrapolate the fast development to the future. I'd rather expect the development to slow down as the important things are in place. And thus, an increase of the minimal kernel version is getting more and more unlikely. But of course I didn't talk to the developers, so I don't know their planning.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Pajn View Post
          Sad, I have read the debate page and that is just worthless.
          Upstart:
          Upstart is the best because it isn't SystemD

          SystemD:
          SystemD is the best because it isn't Upstart
          More like:

          Upstart:
          Is the best because it isn't systemd

          systemd:
          Is the best because it was developed after upstart and thus is more recent and shiny.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Pajn View Post
            Pros:

            To me SystemD looks more and more like a cancer, it grows and grows and it gets harder and
            harder to remove it without killing the patient.

            If Debian would switch to SystemD, the rest would be forced to take the same route as it's
            no longer possible to use another init deamon without getting too much trouble.
            Originally posted by erendorn View Post
            The reason it grows is that it provides features that developers, maintainers and admins want to have, and that no other init system provides.
            The reason it's harder and harder to remove is that it provides features that developers, maintainers and admins actually use, and that no other init system provides.

            You cannot really count that as a con.
            You both are actually right. Pajn is saying it's difficult to make systemd modular (it is possible though, but hard now because it's growing so fast) and erendorm is saying those things that can't be removed and replaced are actually awesome anyways.

            I have to say, systemd is really fast, I think it's the future, and that it could even be modularized after the development slows down. Even though my distro (Ubuntu) uses Upstart, I'd much rather have it. It was really worth the speed increase last time I installed it; and that was on a Pentium 4! I hope they pick systemd.

            Comment

            Working...
            X