Debian To Switch To Systemd Or Upstart

[tinche]

From the article (and as has been mentioned several times upthread):

"Upstart, meanwhile, is mostly just found on Ubuntu Linux among tier-one distributions."

So RHEL and CentOS aren't tier-one distributions any more? I just wrote three Upstart service configuration files the other day for CentOS, and I actually liked it. I would have liked it even more if CentOS didn't package an ancient version of Upstart. Also, I could get it to work without problems, as opposed to another person up-thread.

[leif81]

FWIW, here are common systemd myths answered: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html

Including Myth: systemd being Linux-only makes it impossible for Debian to adopt it as default.

[valeriodean]

If Debian take seriously systemd then, meanwhile, they must think to drop the support to the others kernel.
LP has stated clearly that they do *not* support nothing than linux, so everythink must be implemented downstream.
Debian is ready to do that? I don't think.
So they think to drop the others kernel support? I don't think.
Then why they put systemd in the list? I have no idea.

[ObiWan]

upstart
pro

• preventing systemd dominace
• some debian devs are already familiar with it
• maybe better portability to non linux archs

contra

• maybe seen as a political decision pro Canonical

systemd
pro

• a lot of distribution already using it (Fedora,OpenSuSE,Arch,...)
• is more than just an init system

contra

• "bloated" (cause it's more than just an init system)
• RedHat seems to slowly force other distributions to use it, by making other software depending on it
• not portable at the moment

As systemd user it would be nice to see Debian using systemd, but having a counterweight against systemd with them using upstart would also be nice.

[Hamish Wilson]

So RHEL and CentOS aren't tier-one distributions any more? I just wrote three Upstart service configuration files the other day for CentOS, and I actually liked it. I would have liked it even more if CentOS didn't package an ancient version of Upstart.

Depends on what he means by tier. Enterprise solutions can not be grouped with bleeding edge desktops.

I personally like systemd, but that has more to due with the fact that before its existence I never had the need to mess around that much with my system's init system. As I am using Arch now this has become unavoidable, and from a mostly end-user and administrative perspective I have found systemd to not be that difficult or cumbersome to use, and actually rather convenient.

And while I do understand the complaints against it being Linux only, I do also understand why the systemd developers wanted to target currently Linux only features for the sake of advancing those features on Linux, rather than just avoiding them simply because the BSDs do not have the man power or capital to integrate them into their own system as of yet. Are the free software radeon drivers poor because they did the same, which eventually forced the BSDs to put some effort into their own graphics stack in order to make them supported?

[uid313]

If you want to use BSD or Solaris use BSD or Solaris. It will be great if Debian drops BSD, Hurd and whatever, because they will focus on Linux.

I only use Linux and really like it, but times changes and maybe later there will be other systems that are greater, then you want portability.

I only used BSD and Solaris for a couple of minutes in a virtual machine, never on real hardware.

But portability is great. I like to keep my doors open and have alternatives and an escape route.

[gens]

nope.
alot of projects get shut down for the favour of becoming a systemd modul/part. but systemd is not meant to be used modularwiese (except its given as false argument over and over again). where this leads to is clearly shown in this case:

gnome: we demand logind so we demand systemd
systemd-maintainer: we dont seperate the systemd moduls into own packages
systemd: we dont do your work

result: redhat pushes systemd into debian with gnome.
nice move, not!

hehe
i wish people would stop believing all that crap put out by gnome, console-kit and systemd people

to add
gnome "you can do what you like, we extendable" http://igurublog.wordpress.com/2012/...ing-in-threes/ (this is pure comedy)
even gnome 2 was dropped from slackware as it was idiotically hard to maintain

systemd argument "init scripts are horrible and complicated" check slackware init scripts, it's where i learned (proper) scripting
bonus http://merlyn.cz/?p=65

pottering and the rest of em have a grand idea of a GNOME OS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNOME#Systemd_controversy
they do not care about anything or anybody else (also check MIR/unity; same crap only gnome wants the kernel and init, not the display)
http://sporkbox.us/blog/?r=page/95 (arch should rethink their "Keep It Simple" motto)

faster boot times is also a fallacy as faster (parallel daemon initiation) boot times can be accomplished in many other, non intrusive, ways (even in scripts)
mind you faster boot times is the main argument that spawns fanboys

they even want to make cgroups systemd only...

http://www.linux.com/news/featured-blogs/200-libby-clark/733595-all-about-the-linux-kernel-cgroups-redesign

and that is by the guy that linus yelled at for being an idiot
(thank god theres linus)

single minded decision making leads to bad decisions, as shown by gnome and the croatian government


anyway, i personally dont care about this all as it does'nt affect me
if you gonna use only the latest gnome3 then this is awsome for you

im just trying to teach people that there is many ways of doing things (in programming), use your brain
dont believe everything your read, especially if its presented in a non-sciency way (aka propaganda, read lennart's and (at least some) gnome devs blogs for examples)


PS i had over 100 console-kits running in the background at one point... genious

[pingufunkybeat]

So RHEL and CentOS aren't tier-one distributions any more?

Both have decided to ditch Upstart for systemd with the next version, so they are a bad argument for Debian adopting Upstart in the future.

[liam]

I feel the same about systemd.

Both Upstart and systemd suck

OpenRC FTW!





'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a
universal interface'

(Doug McIlroy)

In Other Words - Don't design like polkit or systemd

That last bit is really funny.
Systemd does one thing. It handles process management. It has many optional components (services) that let it perform certain tasks with groups of processes, but it does one thing.
Systemd has been a really big win for linux, and yes, it is linux only. That was one of the points. Satan especially said that he wants to take advantage of the "power" of linux, but that seems a good thing since there's little reason to hobble our systems for the sakes of other kernels. Would they do the same? I'd think not, and, what's more, I don't know why they would.

[Akka]

If Debian take seriously systemd then, meanwhile, they must think to drop the support to the others kernel.
LP has stated clearly that they do *not* support nothing than linux, so everythink must be implemented downstream.
Debian is ready to do that? I don't think.
So they think to drop the others kernel support? I don't think.
Then why they put systemd in the list? I have no idea.

Probably because in reality most debian devs probably don't care about anything besides linux. Both upstart and systemd is linux only. But if they target a "modern" event based init system with good support from upstream systemd and upstart is the only realistic alternatives.