Systemd 214 Comes "Stuffed With Great New Features"

[prodigy_]

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)

I don't have systemd for being single package, I hate it for being a useless bloated piece of shit. I hate KDE for the same reason.

[psychoticmeow]

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

You're entitled to your opinion.

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.

Disingenuous, we've covered what systemd is and isn't many times before, if you still do not understand it that's your own failing.

Name one.

You clearly didn't read the article, because it contains a demonstration of a very exciting feature (systemd-nspawn).

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.

What agenda? Going to go into some crazy conspiracy theory this time, or can you actually explain yourself without hyperbole?

I don't have systemd for being single package, I hate it for being a useless bloated piece of shit. I hate KDE for the same reason.

That's nice, and we should care why exactly?

[TheBlackCat]

Name one.


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.

You still haven't answered my question: if systemd doesn't have any useful features, why are so many distros and DEs that are not controlled by Red Hat using it?

[bkor]

You still haven't answered my question: if systemd doesn't have any useful features, why are so many distros and DEs that are not controlled by Red Hat using it?

Every systemd using distribution is controlled by Red Hat :-P

[wargames]

Systemd evolution

Version 344: We know you like classic games, that's why we have included Tetris directly in systemd. Why download a separate piece of software when you can have it all in systemd?

Version 478: Are you sick of buying AAA games and expending money on them? Lucky you! Now you can play Metro 3150 and other AAA games directly from systemd. Are you ready? There we go.... Don't forget to use your verichip reader when logging in!

Version 666: Now you don't need to install anything else, everything is included in systemd 666 black hole edition. You knew resistence is futile right from the start.

[caligula]

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.

You're so totally wrong. Let's say I have a simple KDE program like Kate and a distro like Arch Linux. Are you claiming my KDE depends on unnecessary stuff like Webkit? I didn't even install a browser. I doubt that. It's modular. That's the point. I only need to install webkit if I really need it. That is with konqueror. Not with Digikam or Kate. Simple.

[FLHerne]

You're so totally wrong. Let's say I have a simple KDE program like Kate and a distro like Arch Linux. Are you claiming my KDE depends on unnecessary stuff like Webkit? I didn't even install a browser. I doubt that. It's modular. That's the point. I only need to install webkit if I really need it. That is with konqueror. Not with Digikam or Kate. Simple.

You do need quite a big pile of libs that aren't really necessary, because kdeui etc in KDE4 contain far too much stuff and depend on things even if you don't use the features that require the dependency.

Of course, a big part of KF5 changes was splitting kdelibs into smaller bits with less dependencies, so KDE 'bloat' moaners will have even less to moan about.

[Krejzi]

I can't believe Michael failed to mention one of the most important things:


* The support for SysV and LSB init scripts has been removed
from the systemd daemon itself. Instead, it is now
implemented as a generator that creates native systemd units
from these scripts when needed. This enables us to remove a
substantial amount of legacy code from PID 1, following the
fact that many distributions only ship a very small number
of LSB/SysV init scripts nowadays.


Ya' know what this means? Less code in PID1!

[erendorn]

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.

thanks! .

[mdias]

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.

Oh, you look so enlightened! Would you care to make a list of points explaining what is it that systemd does so wrong at replacing the init system (explaining exacly why), and how the alternatives do it better, pretty please?
As a bonus you could also make another list of that "everything else" that systemd realy sucks at and how/why!