Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lennart Talks Up The Power Of systemd-sysext For Testing /usr Changes

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by andrei_me View Post

    ...

    The hate that systemd get is from those whom doesn't bother to go through the learning curve of a new tech, even if it fixes several of the existing issues
    I've created a few systemd unit files and yes I like it, but no systemd is not THE standard, and also goes contrary to the UNIX philosophy at times.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by evert_mouw View Post

      I've created a few systemd unit files and yes I like it, but no systemd is not THE standard, and also goes contrary to the UNIX philosophy at times.
      So what is the standard? Ad-hoc scripts?

      Comment


      • #23
        I think this is a neat concept. This was also done 10 years ago...

        https://github.com/GregorR/snowflake

        Comment


        • #24
          While the idea itself is not actually that bad, I fear it may create more complex configuration options than it potentially solves. When someone suddenly depends on an extension being enabled for something it may be a way of painting yourself in. The idea is ok , but will people use it sane or will it become a mess?!

          http://www.dirtcellar.net

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by evert_mouw View Post

            I've created a few systemd unit files and yes I like it, but no systemd is not THE standard, and also goes contrary to the UNIX philosophy at times.
            I'd argue that a philosophy born from a time in which 64k of RAM was worth a year's salary and CPUs couldn't multitask needs to be buried. Computers have moved on, but some of the antiquated philosophies from the Early Days haven't. There's very little software these days that adhere to "the Unix philosophy" and that's only natural. Software philosophy has moved on as new hardware capabilities and orders of magnitudes of available resources have allowed new concepts that places a lot of single tasking software in the obsolescence bucket.

            I don't really like systemd 100%, but I get tired of religious adherences to "The Way" as if it's the only True Way of doing things.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by sinepgib View Post

              I didn't get it, how do you mean?
              1. Preload KDE overlay into file-system cache (cat /path/to/overlay)
              2. Mount it using systemd-sysext
              3. Hope that the system uses the file-system cache (and doesn't read from disk), therefore massively boosting load times

              Should be faster than ureadahead as we preload one big file (sequential) instead of many small files (random)...

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

                I'd argue that a philosophy born from a time in which 64k of RAM was worth a year's salary and CPUs couldn't multitask needs to be buried. Computers have moved on, but some of the antiquated philosophies from the Early Days haven't. There's very little software these days that adhere to "the Unix philosophy" and that's only natural. Software philosophy has moved on as new hardware capabilities and orders of magnitudes of available resources have allowed new concepts that places a lot of single tasking software in the obsolescence bucket.

                I don't really like systemd 100%, but I get tired of religious adherences to "The Way" as if it's the only True Way of doing things.
                The UNIX philosophy is not about RAM and CPU, not at all. It is about engineering, design, clean interfaces, avoiding complexity, not running into a dependency hell. Lots of it still applies in modern software engineering.

                https://homepage.cs.uri.edu/~thenry/...t/ch01s06.html

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by stormcrow View Post

                  I'd argue that a philosophy born from a time in which 64k of RAM was worth a year's salary and CPUs couldn't multitask needs to be buried. Computers have moved on, but some of the antiquated philosophies from the Early Days haven't. There's very little software these days that adhere to "the Unix philosophy" and that's only natural. Software philosophy has moved on as new hardware capabilities and orders of magnitudes of available resources have allowed new concepts that places a lot of single tasking software in the obsolescence bucket.

                  I don't really like systemd 100%, but I get tired of religious adherences to "The Way" as if it's the only True Way of doing things.
                  I agree that people made a religion of the Unix way as if it were the beginning and end of good engineering, but it's worth noting that philosophy isn't only about resource efficiency (I'd argue in most cases composition of many commands is the opposite, and it's central to that philosophy, that's why modularity in software increases as hardware gets cheaper, instead of the other way around) but rather about maintainability.
                  As with anything, in reality it has its own pros and cons and you have to deal with trade offs and different priorities that are context dependent, etc.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    I usually hate systemd but I have to admit this feature is cool.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by intelfx View Post

                      "The dogs bark, but the caravan goes on"
                      You may bark as loud as you wish

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X