Systemd 214 Comes "Stuffed With Great New Features"

[oleid]

Will this sandboxing be cross-desktop or is it a Gnome only thing?

If it's in systemd, how could it be gnome-only?

being able to rebuild /var if it's empty at boot time is my favourite! Perfect for live CDs or fat clients. To date, I had to use a self made script which copied specific stuff over. But this was slow...

[przemoli]

The more the merier.

Duno why people hate SystemD for being single package.

Anybody around hate KDE for being single package?
(Yes both are as modular. Single core + many replaceable additions)

[TheBlackCat]

systemd DOES have many great features.

its the political agenda and some of the quirks in the implementation that are there to push the agenda which pisses off people.

You are new here, that is the only reason I can see for you to make such an obviously false statement. If you had spent any time here you would know that most of the anti-systemd folks criticized it on the grounds that it doesn't have many (often any) new, useful features.

[z411]

I don't see how you can still keep defending systemd. This shit is getting out of hand.

Anybody around hate KDE for being single package?
(Yes both are as modular. Single core + many replaceable additions)

Actually? Yes. KDE is well known in most communities for being a huge and slow thing and the fact that most of Qt applications used by KDE are so tightly tied to KDE dependencies is often criticized, too.
It's just that it's not such much of a problem because it's a DE and you can just switch to another DE if you don't like it.

But now we're having a project trying to do the same thing, except it's trying to take over the core system.

[curaga]

Doubt MS is paying anyone to bash systemd. Most of them are "i think i am cool using a featureless WM" neckbeards that the best they can do is write shitty command line programs nobody uses.

Spoken like the person who couldn't write anything if their life depended on it.

[erendorn]

Where can I learn more about containers?
Are they as secure as a full virtualization stack?

[interested]

Where can I learn more about containers?
Are they as secure as a full virtualization stack?

Security isn't quite there yet, I think kdbus is a missing key security feature, but while security is improving so that one day they may be used on the wild internet, the main goal with systemd's OS containers are testing and development, like quickly running a Debian container on top of a Fedora distro (it is a one liner to do so), or running a testing version of your distro, or making a test network with many client OS' connecting to a server.

Here is an older article: http://lwn.net/Articles/572957/

The goal is that the same OS image should run flawlessly on either bare metal, a VM or in a container. And that is AFAIK a key strength of OS containers, that the software and OS they run aren't modified in any way to accommodate the container system. They are also super lightweight especially compared to VM's.

[prodigy_]

The degree of FUD that comes up everytime Systemd is mentioned makes me sick.

The degree of hype that comes up every time systemd is mentioned makes me sick.

It's just a boot manager

Are you for real? First, there's no such thing as "boot manager". Second, systemd, unfortunately, tries to be way more than just an init replacement. Not that it's exceptionally good at replacing init but it's much worse at everything else.

[prodigy_]

systemd DOES have many great features.

Name one.

its the political agenda and some of the quirks in the implementation that are there to push the agenda which pisses off people.

No, not really. The agenda is the reason why it's so inconceivable to see adoption on the scale we see it now. But even if we look at systemd from a purely technical point of view, it's s still just a piece of crapware - a bloated collection of daemons that can't offer anything we couldn't happily live without.

[interested]

I don't see how you can still keep defending systemd. This shit is getting out of hand.



Actually? Yes. KDE is well known in most communities for being a huge and slow thing and the fact that most of Qt applications used by KDE are so tightly tied to KDE dependencies is often criticized, too.
It's just that it's not such much of a problem because it's a DE and you can just switch to another DE if you don't like it.

But now we're having a project trying to do the same thing, except it's trying to take over the core system.

KDE is bigger and more resource hungry than lightweight DE's, but it is also much more capable.

That systemd now has become the future new way of running and maintaining Linux is actually a good thing. Systemd solves so many problems and have so many new features, and is actually ready to deal with present computing problems like OS containers, rapid scaling and mass deployment.

Some people have been wasting years of slandering Lennart Poettering and systemd, making all sorts of rubbish claims about either instead of actually working towards an alternative to systemd. The end result is that nobody in the Linux world seems work for an alternative in that mistaken belief, that by doing nothing everything will keep working as it is.

It is quite interesting that OpenBSD have started cloning systemd features (they have a GSoC project), and there can be no doubt that BSD will get a modern init system down the road too, heavily inspired by systemd.