I spent the last 10 minutes googling to try to find out what all the hate is for SystemD (and what it is). Here is what I've found, according to "the web":
* SystemD gives flexibility about when and how services are started in a way that old init scripts could not
* Its currently a bit rough around the edges
* It can significantly lower boot time in the real world Chief complaints seem to be
* "its not unix-y"
* Its new, and a bit complex
* If its screwed up, the system may not boot (then again, ditto with init scripts / fstab / grub.cfg / initrd / any of a zillion other things)
* People dont like the developer
Is that an accurate summary? Are there any technical issues that Im not getting? It just seems to be a lot of vitriol amounting to "I dont like learning new systems" (which, honestly, is a valid criticism-- but its not a technical deficiency).
I am not familiar with KVM or other Linux VM solutions.
I do know that during my VCP cert course, all students were provided with a VMWare ESXi infrastructure that was entirely virtual, contained in a vApp on a parent vSphere infrastructure. We all had our own connection on our own vSwitch, but no uplinks to everyone else, so there really wasnt much anyone could do to interfere with other students.
I suppose one of the students could try to defeat the vSwitch segregation via an exploit, but I think if they pull that off they dont need the class and deserve an instant A (assuming responsible disclosure).
Not if they are on private VLANs (still not clear if it is a standard or not). VMWare supports this; the idea is roughly analogous to AP isolation on a wifi AP-- "isolated" nodes can all talk to the gateway (the community / public node), but cannot talk to each other.
And VLANs actually are for security, and can provide far superior security than ACLs, since unless you have a trunk port or layer 3 switches, it is impossible for two devices on different VLANs to communicate, short of a switch misconfiguration. Its probably second to air-gapping in terms of security-- its sort of a logical implementation of "air gapped switches", except that they CAN be joined together if someone gets onto the switch.
So if the i7 is more energy efficient per-workload, that makes it even more onesided.
As I recall, the fight gets even more brutal when doing things like AES or anything optimized with an instruction set, or anything bound by memory bandwidth.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=samsung_exynos5_dual&num=6 Thats the first-gen Core series vs an A15. Note that it completes its work in 1/3 the time. Ivy bridge is ~30% faster for the same parts, and uses less power (~1/2), and thats not a particularly optimal processor either. Im not sure if anyone has ever compared one of the low-power i7s or Xeons (ie, E3 1220Lv2) to ARM, but I imagine it wouldnt be pretty.
THe core i7 might very well still win. Remember that intel is more efficient in computing work per watt, and an Ivy Bridge core i7 3770k uses 77w. If your average arm chip uses 2 watts, that means that ~30 arm chips will still get beaten by the core i7....
they (barring any fine print) do have to shut up and provide it.
They have to do no such thing; doesnt Verizon have clauses allowing them to terminate at any time at their discretion?
Beyond that, "unlimited" clearly is not literal, as they cannot possibly provide "truly" unlimited bandwidth. Any reasonable individual would understand it to have limits, just as an "all you can eat buffet" has limits.
No, it wouldnt. Another poster's math indicated that he had to use full load bandwidth for 24 straight days. My connection is ~1/15th of his speed, and I can watch highest-quality netflix with no stuttering. That means that you would need at least ~15 simultaneous netflix movies going, constantly, for 24 days straight, to hit that usage-- which isnt remotely plausible, since netflix caps how many devices can sign onto your account at once (~5?).
Whats BS is getting a free gift on tuesday, and then complaining when you dont get another on wednesday. They offered a free service: no warranty, no contract, no guarantees, and no cost. That doesnt mean you get a permenant entitlement to run your code on their servers in perpetuity.
You're buying a license. You also are not allowed to re-sell licenses to Blizzard games, or MS Office, or a lot of software, and I dont believe that has ever been successfully fought.
To be clear, for the average adult male, we're talking about a 1kg ball of vitamin C-- hence the "mechanical death" part. I dont know that your body responds well to 1kg of anything taken orally.
On the flip side, having all that stuff in userspace surely means a massive performance hit, does it not?
I seem to recall for instance with various *nixes it is possible to have a single box handling tens of thousands of IPSec requests, because IPSec is handled within the kernel (IIRC), whereas that same box might handle a few hundred OpenVPN sessions simply because it is all userland and context switching absolutely kills performance.
If that is an accurate example of the type of performance hit incurred on the networking layer, would you really want that in userland?
Live by mob vigilante justice, die by mob vigilante justice.
One of the reasons that you generally dont want vigilantes running around is that its really hard to hold them accountable... especially when their very name is "anonymity". Of course, the "real" (?) anonymous could just deny involvement, and everyone can go back to cheering them on the next time they hack the current Big Bad.
Slashdot Mirror
I spent the last 10 minutes googling to try to find out what all the hate is for SystemD (and what it is). Here is what I've found, according to "the web":
* SystemD gives flexibility about when and how services are started in a way that old init scripts could not
* Its currently a bit rough around the edges
* It can significantly lower boot time in the real world
Chief complaints seem to be
* "its not unix-y"
* Its new, and a bit complex
* If its screwed up, the system may not boot (then again, ditto with init scripts / fstab / grub.cfg / initrd / any of a zillion other things)
* People dont like the developer
Is that an accurate summary? Are there any technical issues that Im not getting? It just seems to be a lot of vitriol amounting to "I dont like learning new systems" (which, honestly, is a valid criticism-- but its not a technical deficiency).
I am not familiar with KVM or other Linux VM solutions.
I do know that during my VCP cert course, all students were provided with a VMWare ESXi infrastructure that was entirely virtual, contained in a vApp on a parent vSphere infrastructure. We all had our own connection on our own vSwitch, but no uplinks to everyone else, so there really wasnt much anyone could do to interfere with other students.
I suppose one of the students could try to defeat the vSwitch segregation via an exploit, but I think if they pull that off they dont need the class and deserve an instant A (assuming responsible disclosure).
Not if they are on private VLANs (still not clear if it is a standard or not). VMWare supports this; the idea is roughly analogous to AP isolation on a wifi AP-- "isolated" nodes can all talk to the gateway (the community / public node), but cannot talk to each other.
And VLANs actually are for security, and can provide far superior security than ACLs, since unless you have a trunk port or layer 3 switches, it is impossible for two devices on different VLANs to communicate, short of a switch misconfiguration. Its probably second to air-gapping in terms of security-- its sort of a logical implementation of "air gapped switches", except that they CAN be joined together if someone gets onto the switch.
So if the i7 is more energy efficient per-workload, that makes it even more onesided.
As I recall, the fight gets even more brutal when doing things like AES or anything optimized with an instruction set, or anything bound by memory bandwidth.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=samsung_exynos5_dual&num=6
Thats the first-gen Core series vs an A15. Note that it completes its work in 1/3 the time. Ivy bridge is ~30% faster for the same parts, and uses less power (~1/2), and thats not a particularly optimal processor either. Im not sure if anyone has ever compared one of the low-power i7s or Xeons (ie, E3 1220Lv2) to ARM, but I imagine it wouldnt be pretty.
THe core i7 might very well still win. Remember that intel is more efficient in computing work per watt, and an Ivy Bridge core i7 3770k uses 77w. If your average arm chip uses 2 watts, that means that ~30 arm chips will still get beaten by the core i7....
you forgot the 2-4w for RAM, if not more.
Synthetic
they (barring any fine print) do have to shut up and provide it.
They have to do no such thing; doesnt Verizon have clauses allowing them to terminate at any time at their discretion?
Beyond that, "unlimited" clearly is not literal, as they cannot possibly provide "truly" unlimited bandwidth. Any reasonable individual would understand it to have limits, just as an "all you can eat buffet" has limits.
So, if his answer would have been, "Porn. 77TB of porn" Verizon would have had no recourse?
Sure they would. "We choose not to serve you as a customer."
Problem solved.
(and that was believable)
No, it wouldnt. Another poster's math indicated that he had to use full load bandwidth for 24 straight days. My connection is ~1/15th of his speed, and I can watch highest-quality netflix with no stuttering. That means that you would need at least ~15 simultaneous netflix movies going, constantly, for 24 days straight, to hit that usage-- which isnt remotely plausible, since netflix caps how many devices can sign onto your account at once (~5?).
What part of "all you can eat buffet" didnt you understand? Why are you so upset that I brought my pet pygmy elephant in to gorge?
Why offer an all you can eat sushi buffet and then complain when someone brings his pet walrus in to gorge? I thought it was unlimited!
Whats BS is getting a free gift on tuesday, and then complaining when you dont get another on wednesday. They offered a free service: no warranty, no contract, no guarantees, and no cost. That doesnt mean you get a permenant entitlement to run your code on their servers in perpetuity.
You're buying a license. You also are not allowed to re-sell licenses to Blizzard games, or MS Office, or a lot of software, and I dont believe that has ever been successfully fought.
To be clear, for the average adult male, we're talking about a 1kg ball of vitamin C-- hence the "mechanical death" part. I dont know that your body responds well to 1kg of anything taken orally.
Because this is slashdot, and it has become hip to point at any curating or reducing of their free services as violating "dont be evil".
I knew we never should have invaded canada.
I think the proper person to blame for embedding GA and FB tracking is the webmaster, not Google and Facebook.
On the flip side, having all that stuff in userspace surely means a massive performance hit, does it not?
I seem to recall for instance with various *nixes it is possible to have a single box handling tens of thousands of IPSec requests, because IPSec is handled within the kernel (IIRC), whereas that same box might handle a few hundred OpenVPN sessions simply because it is all userland and context switching absolutely kills performance.
If that is an accurate example of the type of performance hit incurred on the networking layer, would you really want that in userland?
Yall are posting in a troll thread.
Hint: Google parent's post.
Sounds like it really does not matter then; who cares whether its quantum or not when it provides less value at a higher price?
Live by mob vigilante justice, die by mob vigilante justice.
One of the reasons that you generally dont want vigilantes running around is that its really hard to hold them accountable... especially when their very name is "anonymity". Of course, the "real" (?) anonymous could just deny involvement, and everyone can go back to cheering them on the next time they hack the current Big Bad.
Question is, which one is more "real"?
The one I can pay taxes with, exchange for RMB in china, and expect to retain its price over the span of 6 months.
So you're saying the police should come bust down my door and shoot my dog in the face if I walk off with your pencil?
Im pretty sure he did not, in fact, say that. I might suggest you re-read his post.
Over reacting on copyright infringement is crazy
So is thinking youre entitled to a single thing on this earth. Sadly, we have a far bigger problem with the latter than the former.