systemd throws away what's good about traditional init systems (like "everything is a file"; modularity; being able to do things with a simple file manager, text editor and maybe a script.
Huh? The big win of systemd over sysvinit is that it returns to "everything is a file". systemd units are simple declarative configuration files, not programs written in a turing-equivalent language.
I mean, Jesus Christ, what the fuck, introducing the halting problem into the configuration files you use to start your system, How the hell could anyone think that was a good idea.
systemd is compatible. It may be the case that some things are not compatible with sysvinit, but surely it's the job of people who want to use sysvinit to make sure things are compatible with it.
This is free software -- the rule is people scratch their own itches. If you want something done then you'd better do it yourself and stop whining that other people aren't doing the job.
Other examples are equally pathetic: "systemd-resolved that constantly interferes with our core network" - I guess they stopped reading manual before getting to "systemctl disable" part?
You've got to wonder why the even installed systemd-resolved. It's not there by default. Do they install the whole Debian distro or something?
'm shocked it takes 130 lines of perl to decode the logs.
~25 lines of that is the BSD license.:-)
IOW you're missing the point. I don't want to have to depend on whatever tiny ass rescue system I boot for disaster recovery to ship a perl interpreter
You don't? My fucking telephone has a perl interpreter! (And systemd:-)).
Lots of people, myself included, have had issues trying to get things which are trivial in pre-systemd or on other OSes to work properly and consistently on systemd. There are many, many, many examples of issues
Many, many examples which are never described in detail, or when enough detail is given to reproduce them turn out to not exist or have already been fixed.
If you want you can write a ~130 line perl program to read systemd journals. I know because i did it when some systemd allergic whiner complained for the 1000th time that you couldn't read systemd logs because they were "binary".
It's a fucking computer. Everything on computers is binary!
Oh, there was one detail, and it exposes the author as a moron:
We tried to build Data Center Light on Debian and Ubuntu, but servers that don't boot, that don't reboot or systemd-resolved that constantly interferes with our core network configuration made it too expensive to run Debian or Ubuntu.
systemd-resolved is an optional package that only a clown would think of installing in a datacenter.
But this idiot actually installed it, then bitches that it is doing exactly what it says it will do.
I'm not having any problems with systemd, so why would I switch to a smaller, less supported distro to avoid it?
The whole joke about Devuan is that you don't have to switch to Devuan to get rid of systemd -- Debian, unlike Devuan, lets you choose the init system you want. Don't like systemd? Just apt-get install sysvinit.
I didn't even know systemd existed until I updated from Squeeze to Jessie and found that "service apache2 restart" didn't work.
Huh? "service apache2 restart" works just fine with systemd. Hell, on Debian you can even do "invoke-rc.d apache2 restart" and it'll notice you're using systemd and do a "systemctl restart apache2" for you.
As an example, under a set of regulations I successfully commented on, each small business was required to keep certain records which include personal information about people who had made products they sell, people they had no contact with.
Slashdot Mirror
Vim? Johnny come lately ignorant heathen. If it isn't Bill Joy's original comment-free code you might as well be running a VI emulator under Emacs.
systemd throws away what's good about traditional init systems (like "everything is a file"; modularity; being able to do things with a simple file manager, text editor and maybe a script.
Huh? The big win of systemd over sysvinit is that it returns to "everything is a file". systemd units are simple declarative configuration files, not programs written in a turing-equivalent language.
I mean, Jesus Christ, what the fuck, introducing the halting problem into the configuration files you use to start your system, How the hell could anyone think that was a good idea.
Did the sense of humor removal hurt much?
(appeal to simplistic analysis of logical fallacy, possibly the biggest logical fallacy of them all).
there are problem areas and some things break
Like what? Bug reports?
systemd is compatible. It may be the case that some things are not compatible with sysvinit, but surely it's the job of people who want to use sysvinit to make sure things are compatible with it.
This is free software -- the rule is people scratch their own itches. If you want something done then you'd better do it yourself and stop whining that other people aren't doing the job.
You answer a question I didn't ask. Who is trying to sabotage what discussion?
Twat.
Other examples are equally pathetic: "systemd-resolved that constantly interferes with our core network" - I guess they stopped reading manual before getting to "systemctl disable" part?
You've got to wonder why the even installed systemd-resolved. It's not there by default. Do they install the whole Debian distro or something?
'm shocked it takes 130 lines of perl to decode the logs.
~25 lines of that is the BSD license. :-)
IOW you're missing the point. I don't want to have to depend on whatever tiny ass rescue system I boot for disaster recovery to ship a perl interpreter
You don't? My fucking telephone has a perl interpreter! (And systemd :-)).
Rather than keep having holy wars over it, foster both systemd and non-systemd distros, and let time decide which is better.
Or, like, have a distro that can run with or without systemd. We could call it "the universal operating system", or "Debian" for short.
You know, offer, unlike Devuan, init system freedom.
Just because it hasn't fucked me over yet, doesn't mean I can't see EXACTLY why it is a bad design with some seriously dangerous 'features'
Care to share? What "seriously dangerous 'features'" does systemd have?
Lots of people, myself included, have had issues trying to get things which are trivial in pre-systemd or on other OSes to work properly and consistently on systemd. There are many, many, many examples of issues
Many, many examples which are never described in detail, or when enough detail is given to reproduce them turn out to not exist or have already been fixed.
Yeah, it's sad when the brain ossifies to the point you can't learn new things. Alzheimer's usually comes soon after.
That and the fact that systemd is incompatible (yes, incompatible) with existing init systems
systemd is very compatible with sysvinit.
therwise it would be a simple configuration option whether to use systemd or something that has stood the test of time.
On Debian there is a simple configuration command to switch between systemd and sysvinit.
If you want you can write a ~130 line perl program to read systemd journals. I know because i did it when some systemd allergic whiner complained for the 1000th time that you couldn't read systemd logs because they were "binary".
It's a fucking computer. Everything on computers is binary!
Oh, there was one detail, and it exposes the author as a moron:
We tried to build Data Center Light on Debian and Ubuntu, but servers that don't boot, that don't reboot or systemd-resolved that constantly interferes with our core network configuration made it too expensive to run Debian or Ubuntu.
systemd-resolved is an optional package that only a clown would think of installing in a datacenter.
But this idiot actually installed it, then bitches that it is doing exactly what it says it will do.
Just because you can submit a patch to something doesn't mean it will be accepted.
True.
What patches to systemd have been rejected? For what reasons?
I'm not having any problems with systemd, so why would I switch to a smaller, less supported distro to avoid it?
The whole joke about Devuan is that you don't have to switch to Devuan to get rid of systemd -- Debian, unlike Devuan, lets you choose the init system you want. Don't like systemd? Just apt-get install sysvinit.
I didn't even know systemd existed until I updated from Squeeze to Jessie and found that "service apache2 restart" didn't work.
Huh? "service apache2 restart" works just fine with systemd. Hell, on Debian you can even do "invoke-rc.d apache2 restart" and it'll notice you're using systemd and do a "systemctl restart apache2" for you.
Uh, if you do that it's not sysvinit, it's just init.
sysvinit = init(1) + all the crap under /etc/rc?.d
The reason there isn't a compatible alternative is because the code is too complex.
That makes no sense at all. How could the complexity of systemd's code have any effect on the difficulty of writing a compatible system?
You are a lying troll.
All his comp sci qualities? The empty set?
One of these things is not like the others, or, from the sublime to the ridiculous.
Brainfuck.
Important questions like "does this look like FORTRAN to you"?
As an example, under a set of regulations I successfully commented on, each small business was required to keep certain records which include personal information about people who had made products they sell, people they had no contact with.
Title 18, Section 2257?