Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: Migrating a Router From Linux To *BSD?
An anonymous reader writes I'm in the camp that doesn't trust systemd. You can discuss the technical merits of all init solutions all you want, but if I wanted to run Windows NT I'd run Windows NT, not Linux. So I've decided to migrate my homebrew router/firewall/samba server to one of the BSDs. Question one is: which BSD? Question two: where's some good documentation regarding setting up a home router/firewall on your favorite BSD?
It's fine if the documentation is highly technical, I've written linux kernel drivers before :) (Got a question? You can Ask Slashdot, too.)
It's fine if the documentation is highly technical, I've written linux kernel drivers before :) (Got a question? You can Ask Slashdot, too.)
However, I don't understand the blatant systemd misrepresentation/hatred
About 80% of the hatred comes from the bandwagon effect. I'll bet the vast majority of the haters have no idea who Poettering, only he's some bad guy we have to hate. The other 20% of the hate comes from graybeard sys admins who know the unique file formats of the 1000 different config utilities Linux has traditionally had and are either afraid to learn anything new or afraid that they might not be so indispensable at their jobs.
What systemd does is give a single consistent way of configuring the system. You want security nightmare, how about the 1000's of freaking shell scripts that call each other in a giant mass of spaghetti to configure a traditional Linux system.
One of the great benefits of systemd is that it is written in C and not a giant mess of shell scripts. With C, you actually get COMPILE TIME CHECKING. With these dammed shell scripts, you have no idea if they work up until they run, and you have no idea what execution path they could go through. Shell scripts are fine a glue code for user programs, but give me something with some static checking like C for critical components.