Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Systemd Is Now Seeing Continuous Fuzzing By Fuzzit

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by yoshi314 View Post

    you either dislike systemd for its NIH approach, or you experience it problems firsthand.

    i've seen systems where official arch linux live images boot 30% of the time. reboot enough times and it boots in such a way that you finally get a shell. on my laptop i sometimes do not get wifi because some services probably start out of order, and it's hard to figure out where the problem lies since logs do not really say much.

    i like systemd for it's clear unit declaration syntax. i absolutely hate debugging issues with services not working as expected. i also dislike how it tries to become a second busybox, only more bloated and fragile.
    second this, debugging systemd services is just about impossible, so much useless bloat in the log files.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Candy View Post
      SystemD

      - started as an init replacement
      - continued to become a service system
      - swallowed all kind of small tools to grow momentum
      - ends up becoming an unspoken religion
      You forgot to add it created a load of vocal ignorant anti-systemd trolls

      Comment


      • #23
        Disgusting™

        Comment


        • #24
          It will simply grow until becoming sufficiently unmanageable that somebody either forks it, starting drastic cleanup and removal of more unstable modules/components OR somebody starts on a New Shiny Thing, meant to fix systemd problems and to replace it - to which everybody (currently preaching systemd) applaud and switch without looking back.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by aht0 View Post
            It will simply grow until becoming sufficiently unmanageable that somebody either forks it, starting drastic cleanup and removal of more unstable modules/components OR somebody starts on a New Shiny Thing, meant to fix systemd problems and to replace it - to which everybody (currently preaching systemd) applaud and switch without looking back.
            I guess I should mention that absolutely NO ONE preaches systemd. You are free to use whatever you like, so if you really must waste your time and resources developing a shiny new Linux distro just to strip systemd out of something, by all means, just do it. I'm sure some people will find value and want to use that. No one hates other people's work just for the sake of hating it, with the only exception being systemd haters themselves.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by aht0 View Post
              <...> OR somebody starts on a New Shiny Thing, meant to fix systemd problems and to replace it - to which everybody (currently preaching systemd) applaud and switch without looking back.
              If and when that happens, and assuming that starting from scratch would really be the only possible way to fix systemd problems — then it will be the rational thing to applaud this systemd replacement and switch to it without looking back.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by jntesteves View Post

                I guess I should mention that absolutely NO ONE preaches systemd. You are free to use whatever you like, so if you really must waste your time and resources developing a shiny new Linux distro just to strip systemd out of something, by all means, just do it.
                Your claim is made void by massive flame wars in threads about systemd - especially threads that somehow imply something negative about systemd.

                Fight by definition has to have at least two sides, you know.

                ​​​​​Don't worry about me

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by intelfx View Post
                  If and when that happens, and assuming that starting from scratch would really be the only possible way to fix systemd problems — then it will be the rational thing to applaud this systemd replacement and switch to it without looking back.
                  You seem to not realize the real problem behind such a "Cycle Of Life for Linux Software".

                  Development paradigm is plain wrong. Instead of cramming in new half-assed features ASAP and then abandoning it when finally (+starting another from zero) the project becomes too complicated/malfunctioning..
                  RATIONAL BEHAVIOUR would be: Finish the most needed features, then introduce new ones, finish these and then just f*king maintain the thing. Less effort spent, shit works, no frustration or breakage. Yeah, kids wanting x new feature and new realease after n week get bored: tough luck.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by yoshi314 View Post
                    i've seen systems where official arch linux live images boot 30% of the time. reboot enough times and it boots in such a way that you finally get a shell. on my laptop i sometimes do not get wifi because some services probably start out of order, and it's hard to figure out where the problem lies since logs do not really say much.
                    .
                    This says a lot more about Arch developers than systemd. There are more systemd support tools and documentation than any other service manager I've ever used. With the possible exception of IBM's AIX. But I never read the AIX documentation because there was too much of it.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by jntesteves View Post

                      I guess I should mention that absolutely NO ONE preaches systemd. You are free to use whatever you like, so if you really must waste your time and resources developing a shiny new Linux distro just to strip systemd out of something, by all means, just do it. I'm sure some people will find value and want to use that. No one hates other people's work just for the sake of hating it, with the only exception being systemd haters themselves.
                      That's a horrible flat out lie. Most stupid and ignorant lie -evar-!

                      EDIT: LP himself has said -repeatedly- that it is his entire goal to make sure that -nothing- in systemd can be ported out. You say by all means just do it, but systemd is -specifically- written to make that incredibly difficult. Have you ever actually -looked- at how internal dependencies are written in systemd? It's literally and by far -THEE- worst spaghetti code ever written by anyone anywhere. It is -literally- impossible to understand and it was written that way on purpose.

                      You seriously need to sit down and talk with the elogind devs. They desperately need documentation because the upstream code itself is doing jack shit for them.
                      Last edited by duby229; 06-18-2019, 09:39 AM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X