Slashdot Mirror
SystemD Gains New Networking Features
jones_supa writes A lot of development work is happening on systemd with just the recent couple of weeks seeing over 200 commits. With the most recent work that has landed, the networkd component has been improved with new features. Among the additions are IP forwarding and masquerading support (patch). This is the minimal support needed and these settings get turned on by default for container network interfaces. Also added was minimal firewall manipulation helpers for systemd's networkd. The firewall manipulation helpers (patch) are used for establishing NAT rules. This support in systemd is provided by libiptc, the library used for communicating with the Linux kernel's Netfilter and changing iptables firewall rulesets. Those wishing to follow systemd development on a daily basis and see what is actually happening under the hood, can keep tabs via the systemd Git viewer.
IP forwarding and masquerading in the init process?
WHAT.
THE.
FUCK!!!!
SystemD is the joke that isn't funny. This is just getting ridiculous. Pottering and his band of evil worms are literally trying to intrude their piece of shit Window-esque system into absolutely every corner of Linux. I'm getting out of LInux entirely. If I wanted to run Windows, I'd run fucking Windows.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
systemd seems dead set on becoming an alternative operative system.
Which wouldn't be a bad thing if it wasn't ruining perfectly good operating systems like Debian while it grows.
I've stuck with Debian for a pretty long time (since around 2000) mostly because I know how everything works. But in the last year running testing, more and more frequently I'll find that something has been yanked out and replaced by something harder to use and understand. Maybe it's finally time to switch to BSD instead.
How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
I'm sure they do. But FreeBSD doesn't have a massive init system intruding itself into every single aspect of the operating system.
Just what the fuck is SystemD supposed to be?
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem is a nail.
Noob coders who simply throw more and more code and "problems" are a perfect example. They don't know when to stop coding up solutions in search of problems.
Systemd devs are a perfect example.
I want an init system. I cannot fathom why an init system needs to do IP forwarding and routing.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Apparently, you're the idiot, because the fact that systemD integrates itself so closely with my GNU^H^H^HSystemD/Linux as PID 1 with a crapload of bloat (that leads to irrecoverable crashes that are marked as wontfix), is against the unix philosophy of doing one thing and doing it good.
Go back to Lennart and continue to suck up to each other. Stupid hipster.
Oh, and while you're listening, get off my lawn!
GNU's Not Unix though so it makes sense :-)
Ahh, so it's ripping off Windows' Service Control Manager, a.k.a. "scum". This will certainly end well.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
A services manager, actually. It starts and stops services on the system, and if they go down, it optionally restarts them. The fact that many services need to start when the system starts is somewhat incidental to the purpose of systemD.
The task you have described seems like something that could be sanely done outside pid1 without worrying that a defect in its significantly larger-than-average-init codebase could cause the entire system to reboot.
Though I guess some might consider that a feature; at least you know you'll never be running without systemd.
Where do you get that idea? There's no IP forwarding and masquerading in the init process. That all happens in the networkd process.
Parallel startup?
And even this is -- in my experience -- terrible on systemd. My admittedly-"old" (2009-era i7 laptop), with systemd, will sit at a (text-only) login screen for 10 seconds or so before it's responsive (type username, hit enter, password displays in cleartext because the "password:" prompt hasn't even shown up). Meanwhile, the disk is whirring away trying to start Postgres, etc. So yeah, you technically got me my login prompt nice and fast, but it's completely useless.
And, like you said, I don't reboot my laptop much (that's what suspend-to-RAM is for...), and my desktop/server just stays on all the time.
Umm, installing SystemD is the trendy thing to do. Criticizing it comes from the learned wisdom of people that have been doing this for a very long time.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
I think they intend to bring stability and unity to Linux by eliminating modularity and choice.
The only reason this situation seems "ugly" is because something is being forced down our throats Microsoft monopoly style. One of the great things about Unix modular design is that you can easily accomodate everyone even if they have mutually exclusive requirements.
SystemD fails at playing nice with the rest of Unix and the vast majority of end users that view it as useless at best.
Your choices should not require you to piss on my fileserver.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Makes me think of the "a car will never be better than a horse" argument.
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Or the echo chamber could be wrong about PID 1.
Like all great lies, it includes a bit of truth:
1. More lines of code equals more bugs.
2. The systemd project has lots of lines of code.
3. PID 1 must be super reliable or bad things will happen.
So far so good right? Stay tuned for the lie:
4. All of systemd is in PID 1. Therefore systend's PID 1 must be buggy and dangerous.
It's about as right as including Bash's line count in a discussion about sysvinit PID1. But don't take my word for it. Echo on bro.
From the fucking article, fucktard.
Nothing is being forced on anybody. The situation is that systemd is popular and well liked by people making actual decisions, and hated by a bunch of loud pundits that don't have any responsibilities and are jealous of the decisions of others.
Nobody is trying to force anybody to use systemd. We like it, we're adopting it, and haters are loudly shouting that we should somehow be stopped, that we shouldn't be allowed to use what we want, that somehow the world would be better of if some giant angry conspiracy could be formed to somehow cast us out, or something like that.
Newsflash: systemd is popular among people with the technical background to be in charge of choosing a daemon and interface manager. SysV was not the Second Coming, it was only better than what came before. We stuck with it for so long because it worked, but it has serious failings that make it unsuitable and non-optimal for a wide variety of real life use cases.
You won't take it away from us, and no, failing to oppress people doesn't make you martyrs.
Keep your silly file server inside of your own network boundaries. Nobody is trying to touch it. Nobody is telling you what to run on it. So don't tell me what to run on mine.
Being against something is needless; just choose what you want for the reasons you want. There is no natural reason to be against everything else that others choose.
I hope so, it is always nice for a big group of haters to have a mass-migration. It is a lot healthier than to stay and whine. Those that leave can enjoy their greener grass, and those that stay have them off the lawn. Everybody wins.
If you hate systemd, don't use it. Problem solved!
I think your reply is isingenuous at best.
Whether or not you like it, it's not unfair to classify systemd as being "forced" on its users. For a start, it's wildly popular with distribution builders, but this doesn't mean jack with anyone else. Secondly, for a while (thought they've promised to me that they're trying to and maybe have by now fixed it), GNOME had a hard dependency of systemd. Being the most popular desktop environment more or less forced the hand of many of the distro builders too.
To me, the whole thing seems odd. I've never seen a massive infrastructure change sweep so rapidly through the community of distributions. Especially such a major component, and double especially when things did actually work successfully before.
Anyway, the only think I know for sure is that my arch laptop now boots slower with systemd than with the old RC scripts.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
So, how does ibe install systemd without the binary logging module? No, not syslogd running atop of the binary logging, that would still make systemd monolithic.
Another modular combination that would interest a lot of people is installing the parallel startup module of systemd, and have it started from inittab, but not install the PID1 part of systemd.
Please tell us how modular systemd really is. Because the people who write the systemd documentation seem to think that systemd is one huge inseparable mess.
They were clearly being sarcastic. Either way, you can decode those binary logs and shoot them as text through a pipe.
Yes, and you can put that manadatory binary data into a mandatory system where the binary logs are punched out as paper tape and then run the paper tape back into a reader when you need them.
Why complicate something when the direct approach has worked well for most people for decades? The more links in the chain, the more work it takes to get at the critical data, the fewer the tools that can work with it and the greater the possibility that critical data can be destroyed or become inaccessible,