Latest Round Of Debian Systemd vs. Upstart Voting Ends

[Delgarde]

I guest they already tested systemd and upstart in jessie... right? XD

Sort of. The committee *have* done a lot of research into the two projects, and both are already available as packages today.

Though I believe their systemd package is a few versions out of date, because it's blocked on this decision - they can't go to a newer version because Gnome requires logind, and the logind from newer systemd packages would require systemd as PID1. There's a shim package (effectively a fork of an earlier version of logind) that would solve the problem, but there's a bunch of issues around handling conflicting packages, so they're waiting for the politics to be sorted out.

[Delgarde]

In other words, being large and monolithic isn't THAT big of a deal. You could say the same about linux itself.

And despite what people keep claiming, it's not especially monolithic either. It's a single codebase, but it's a very modular one - you've got the core systemd daemon, and some dozens of smaller binaries for performing tasks that don't need to be part of PID1.

[GreatEmerald]

As a heads-up, you can find the second part of my Phoenix Wright case on this via this link: http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57899 (still not a whole lot in it at the moment, though)
And as a reminder, the first part is here: http://aceattorney.sparklin.org/jeu.php?id_proces=57684

[Sergio]

Systemd is clearly technically unsurpassed.

I've seen this argument over and over but no one actually elaborates.
I would like to know what exactly makes systemd a superior alternative (I acknowledge my ignorance in init systems).
Thanks.

[Sidicas]

I've seen this argument over and over but no one actually elaborates.
I would like to know what exactly makes systemd a superior alternative (I acknowledge my ignorance in init systems).
Thanks.

Check the two links in the post above yours. It's quite good .

[benalib]

majority of desktop linux users use Upstart
systemd is for a minority running failed crappy and buggy distros like fedora

[shmerl]

majority of desktop linux users use Upstart
systemd is for a minority running failed crappy and buggy distros like fedora

Any numbers to substantiate that? This claim looks completely bogus. Upstart is used nowhere besides Ubuntu, and it's doubtful that Ubuntu outweighs global Linux desktop usage. I'm not even sure if it's the most used distro like it's often claimed. I never saw any numbers which demonstrate it. Let alone that it's more used than all other distros together.

[gens]

I've seen this argument over and over but no one actually elaborates.
I would like to know what exactly makes systemd a superior alternative (I acknowledge my ignorance in init systems).
Thanks.

ye, i wrote a whole page just now about that
and then phoronix ate it :/ (it said it posted..)

i compared calling programs from shell scripts to calling functions from C and calling things over dbus
(its mostly the same thing in the context of the topic)

in short
people keep posting the page on lennarts blog with the comparison of init to systemd to upstart
i note that it compares the "init" program itself to an amalgamation of programs and libraries that are systemd and upstart
that is a heavily biased comparison since
sysvinit comprises of lots of scripts and programs
(main one being used is the shell, that is made for setting variables)
and still on the chart setting the "XDG_WHATEVERITISCALLED" variable can apparently only be done with systemd
(read: it is not scientific at all, and computing is a science)
(i used sysv as example since i don't know upstart)

also i went on a bit about how shell scripts work (as programs) and how a shell starts programs (much like a C program calls functions from libraries)

also questions about comparing init systems
if sysvinit starts console-kit, is whatever console-kit does a feature ?
if i make a script that sets up cgroups and make it run at boot, is that a feature ?
sysv can start apache, is http a feature ?

bottom line, there is too many ways of looking at all this
any one of those options can be made look as the best one
especially if you start talking about the "future" (people tend to forget that many of the "new" things have been done decades ago, sometimes better)

[GreatEmerald]

I've seen this argument over and over but no one actually elaborates.
I would like to know what exactly makes systemd a superior alternative (I acknowledge my ignorance in init systems).
Thanks.

Over what? Upstart, OpenRC, or sysvinit? And in all cases it would be a rather long list... I guess this would be a good reference point, too (note the links in the first sentence): http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/soc...ontainers.html
Or for a quick overview: https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/inits...#Functionality

[gens]

I'm guessing the only reason upstart is the majority is because of distros derived from Ubuntu. Eliminate ubuntu-based distros and upstart will probably be less used than openrc. I agree though, switching to something simply because its popular isn't inherently a good idea. Case in point, Windows.
However
the more popular something becomes, the more attention it gets. In the FOSS community, the more attention something gets, the project will progress more. This is probably why they aren't considering openrc.

if you define popular as "most used by people" then upstart wins by far and is a clear choice


if you define popular as being talked about much...

things that get popular are usually things that are very controversial
that does not say anything about if they are better or if they will become better
it only says there are many people that have have an opinion
(fuck me justing biber is popular, maybe he should be president of the world)

i keep saying computing is a science and should be looked as that
there is no "it sounds better" or "everybody is doing it" in science