It's bizzare -- I've never seen anyone claiming that systemd throws away log messages before, but this slashdot article is full of it, often claiming that it's "policy".
Where is this "policy" described?
Or, if it's not "policy" where are these problems reported as bugs?
That's trivial to do with fail2ban on Red Hat/CentOS 7 with systemd, because systemd throws away all of the messages that fail2ban logs. My firewall is under constant attacks, but systemd deletes all of the logged messages from fail2ban:
What's the bug report number? This is not how systemd is supposed to be working.
But the fact that an error message to stderr is swallowed and impossible to find by systemd means that it is impossible to troubleshoot.
Sorry? stdout and stderr are logged to the journal. Use journalctl to find them.
Also, the server logs to standard syslog, but only messages at logging level Warning or less are logged in the journal, but more important messages are not saved.
Huh? What on earth makes you think this?
root@celtic:~# logger -p local6.emerg "This is a test"
Broadcast message from systemd-journald@celtic (Thu 2015-02-12 11:56:33 CET):
john[20291]: This is a test
Message from syslogd@celtic at Feb 12 11:56:33...
john: This is a test root@celtic:~# journalctl PRIORITY=0 -- Logs begin at Tue 2015-02-10 18:03:58 CET, end at Thu 2015-02-12 11:56:33 CET Feb 12 11:56:33 celtic john[20291]: This is a test
1st: Guy says he hates it, gives no reason, then explains how to use it 2nd: Christopher Barry's rant reported on pipedot 3rd: linux.com article about systemd, with one comment that claims systemd takes 10 minutes to reboot, gives no details, bug report, whatever 4th: Posted on %A %B %e%q, %Y by Markus -- unsubstantiated rant about systemd on arch. 5th: freebsd forum post about Ubuntu going with systemd, one commenter says: "So, yeah, systemd sucks as an init solution, but most people (admins included) will never notice the difference. "...
I'm too bored to carry on. Remarkable absense of fact based explanation.
here are a few good web pages that summarize complaints, but here is one:
Systemd has brought a ton of bloat and cruft that is enabled by default, and has undesired automatic behavior.
But that doesn't answer the question you were asked:
How exactly is systemd causing this problem?
If you'd bothered to read the fucking ariticle you'd have seen that John Goerzen was complaining about a problem he was having on a machine that didn't have systemd installed
So, once again: "How exactly is systemd causing this problem?"
That's why "Geoffrey" was accused of being a troll -- because he is one.
I think you just made nimbius's point for him. Sure, you can systemd gentoo, but you don't have to. From the gentoo wiki page that you linked, at the very top: "It is supported in Gentoo as an alternate init system."
This is how Linux was. If you didn't like the way something worked, you used something else instead. Unlike the large distros that are moving more towards "here is all your crap", love it or leave it.
You mean like Debian, where systemd is the default init system, not the only init system?
For instance, this is my current life (and this is by NO MEANS comprehensive or complete, or even possibly fit for others!!!):
Server - CentOS: no GUI by default, many choices during install for different server functions, dev and build libs easily available, no real bloat, lean and fast. Desktop - Mint, Elementary, etc... Each are user-friendly FOR THE USER, including those migrating from Winblows or Mac.
Well, for me its:
Server: Debian Desktop: Debian Mobile: Debian
(well, I lie, Mobile is Sailfish, but it was Debian (Fremantle) and will be again, I hope).
I see no reason at all to use different distros.
(And, by the way, both Desktop and Mobile use systemd, and Server will, when I get round to upgrading).
The backlash against systemd is 90% people who don't even understand systemd and have been too lazy to RTFM and 10% people who understand the technical tradeoffs and think differently, all spurred on by Slashdot, Phoronix, and a dozen other sites making a mint off the advertising revenue from people visiting the flame war
And the guy that thinks feminists are stopping him banging 14 year old girls like god intended.
I was reading through the article's comments and saw this thread of discussion. Well, it's hard to call it a thread of discussion because John apparently put an end to it right away.
Of course he shut it down, it was pure trolling.
Goerzen writes about a problem he's having with Gnome, Xfce and KDE on a non-systemd system, which is fixed by moving to systemd, and some moron jumps up to claim the problem is Gnome and systemd.
You can read Devuan project news to see things for which systemD dependencies being removed, for example consoleKit2, UDisks2, PolicyKit-1, and PCSC-Lite.
I could do that I suppose.
But since Debian doesn't include consolekit2, for example, that doesn't help.
As a simple matter of fact, as far as I know, the only package in the Debian repo's that (pre)-depends on systemd (with no alternative) is gummiboot.
A bunch of stuff depends on libsystemd0, but that does nothing if systemd isn't pid 1. The Devuan people are making huge efforts to remove those dependencies for some religious reason.
But the question I asked was:
What are the "things written for systemd that distros that need a bit of recoding for a systemd-less system."?
In all that time, I have never seen as many lies, damned lies and half-truths surrounding a project as I have seen around systemd and pretty much the rest of freedesktop.
I certainly agree with you about that.
I have some disagreement about where the lies, damned lies and half-trurths are coming from, however.
Given that Gnome wasn't at all dependent on systemd before, I see no reason why a reasonable development process couldn't have maintained that state in released versions.
Gnome used to be based on CORBA, they decided that was a technicaly bad decision and eventually got rid of it. That was a much larger change than dropping support for the unmaintained consolekit package.
I would also point out that a large part of the anti-systemd side is people who want other people to work for them for free. (Yes, there is now some work in consolekit2 and so on, but it took years of bitching before that happened).
And I haven't yet seen any systemd supporter complaining that we don't have sexual access to teenage girls due to the evil feminists.
I'll just be over here using xfce4 and an init that knows it's supposed to be init.
Well, I read his post somewhat differently (supprise), I see no "backpeddling", just an honest discussion of how hard some things are. There is no "intent" to depend on systemd, just the realisation that nobody other than systemd is going to provide the features Gnome wants.
As for your little parable of robbery with violence, who is being mugged? Somebody gave you something for free, now you're upset that he changes the way it works. Either stop using it or do the work to provide the features Gnome want without systemd.
As for "any sane person who doesn't want systemd" the way some anti-systemd people argue sometimes makes me wonder if that isn't the empty set.
Slashdot Mirror
It's bizzare -- I've never seen anyone claiming that systemd throws away log messages before, but this slashdot article is full of it, often claiming that it's "policy".
Where is this "policy" described?
Or, if it's not "policy" where are these problems reported as bugs?
Your VM's don't have swappable hardware? You don't add disks, memory, cpu's to your VM's?
That's trivial to do with fail2ban on Red Hat/CentOS 7 with systemd, because systemd throws away all of the messages that fail2ban logs. My firewall is under constant attacks, but systemd deletes all of the logged messages from fail2ban:
What's the bug report number? This is not how systemd is supposed to be working.
I see bugs where fail2ban doesn't work with systemd on RedHat because they don't run syslogd and fail2ban reads the syslogd logs (e.g. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1047436)
But I can't find any bugs about systemd "throwing away" messages.
We want Debian without systemd.
Then use Debian without systemd.
How many times do you have to be told that systemd is optional?
But the fact that an error message to stderr is swallowed and impossible to find by systemd means that it is impossible to troubleshoot.
Sorry? stdout and stderr are logged to the journal. Use journalctl to find them.
Also, the server logs to standard syslog, but only messages at logging level Warning or less are logged in the journal, but more important messages are not saved.
Huh? What on earth makes you think this?
Uh, it was you who provided the search. You claimed it would show "most comments are fact-based and explain what is wrong with [systemd]".
I suspected before doing the search that was not what it would show (seriously, "systemd sucks"?). I was right.
If I'm expected to google the contents of your brain to find the real search then I'll admit to not being up to it.
have a ton of issues with me being forced to run systemd or else switch distros or be stuck with an old release
So run Jessie without systemd.
Where's the problem?
Tried it.
https://www.google.fr/search?q..."systemd+sucks"
About 524 results (0.15 seconds)
1st: Guy says he hates it, gives no reason, then explains how to use it ...
2nd: Christopher Barry's rant reported on pipedot
3rd: linux.com article about systemd, with one comment that claims systemd takes 10 minutes to reboot, gives no details, bug report, whatever
4th: Posted on %A %B %e%q, %Y by Markus -- unsubstantiated rant about systemd on arch.
5th: freebsd forum post about Ubuntu going with systemd, one commenter says: "So, yeah, systemd sucks as an init solution, but most people (admins included) will never notice the difference. "
I'm too bored to carry on. Remarkable absense of fact based explanation.
Tha's bizzare. Exactlty what log messages were missing? Got any source for a "policy" about not logging some messages?
here are a few good web pages that summarize complaints, but here is one:
Systemd has brought a ton of bloat and cruft that is enabled by default, and has undesired automatic behavior.
But that doesn't answer the question you were asked:
How exactly is systemd causing this problem?
If you'd bothered to read the fucking ariticle you'd have seen that John Goerzen was complaining about a problem he was having on a machine that didn't have systemd installed
So, once again: "How exactly is systemd causing this problem?"
That's why "Geoffrey" was accused of being a troll -- because he is one.
I think you just made nimbius's point for him. Sure, you can systemd gentoo, but you don't have to. From the gentoo wiki page that you linked, at the very top: "It is supported in Gentoo as an alternate init system."
This is how Linux was. If you didn't like the way something worked, you used something else instead. Unlike the large distros that are moving more towards "here is all your crap", love it or leave it.
You mean like Debian, where systemd is the default init system, not the only init system?
For instance, this is my current life (and this is by NO MEANS comprehensive or complete, or even possibly fit for others!!!):
Server - CentOS: no GUI by default, many choices during install for different server functions, dev and build libs easily available, no real bloat, lean and fast.
Desktop - Mint, Elementary, etc... Each are user-friendly FOR THE USER, including those migrating from Winblows or Mac.
Well, for me its:
Server: Debian
Desktop: Debian
Mobile: Debian
(well, I lie, Mobile is Sailfish, but it was Debian (Fremantle) and will be again, I hope).
I see no reason at all to use different distros.
(And, by the way, both Desktop and Mobile use systemd, and Server will, when I get round to upgrading).
The backlash against systemd is 90% people who don't even understand systemd and have been too lazy to RTFM and 10% people who understand the technical tradeoffs and think differently, all spurred on by Slashdot, Phoronix, and a dozen other sites making a mint off the advertising revenue from people visiting the flame war
And the guy that thinks feminists are stopping him banging 14 year old girls like god intended.
I'm 55
Newb.
I was reading through the article's comments and saw this thread of discussion. Well, it's hard to call it a thread of discussion because John apparently put an end to it right away.
Of course he shut it down, it was pure trolling.
Goerzen writes about a problem he's having with Gnome, Xfce and KDE on a non-systemd system, which is fixed by moving to systemd, and some moron jumps up to claim the problem is Gnome and systemd.
You can read Devuan project news to see things for which systemD dependencies being removed, for example consoleKit2, UDisks2, PolicyKit-1, and PCSC-Lite.
I could do that I suppose.
But since Debian doesn't include consolekit2, for example, that doesn't help.
As a simple matter of fact, as far as I know, the only package in the Debian repo's that (pre)-depends on systemd (with no alternative) is gummiboot.
A bunch of stuff depends on libsystemd0, but that does nothing if systemd isn't pid 1. The Devuan people are making huge efforts to remove those dependencies for some religious reason.
But the question I asked was:
What are the "things written for systemd that distros that need a bit of recoding for a systemd-less system."?
In all that time, I have never seen as many lies, damned lies and half-truths surrounding a project as I have seen around systemd and pretty much the rest of freedesktop.
I certainly agree with you about that.
I have some disagreement about where the lies, damned lies and half-trurths are coming from, however.
Given that Gnome wasn't at all dependent on systemd before, I see no reason why a reasonable development process couldn't have maintained that state in released versions.
Gnome used to be based on CORBA, they decided that was a technicaly bad decision and eventually got rid of it. That was a much larger change than dropping support for the unmaintained consolekit package.
I would also point out that a large part of the anti-systemd side is people who want other people to work for them for free. (Yes, there is now some work in consolekit2 and so on, but it took years of bitching before that happened).
And I haven't yet seen any systemd supporter complaining that we don't have sexual access to teenage girls due to the evil feminists.
I'll just be over here using xfce4 and an init that knows it's supposed to be init.
Have an appropriate amount of fun.
Well, I read his post somewhat differently (supprise), I see no "backpeddling", just an honest discussion of how hard some things are. There is no "intent" to depend on systemd, just the realisation that nobody other than systemd is going to provide the features Gnome wants.
As for your little parable of robbery with violence, who is being mugged? Somebody gave you something for free, now you're upset that he changes the way it works. Either stop using it or do the work to provide the features Gnome want without systemd.
As for "any sane person who doesn't want systemd" the way some anti-systemd people argue sometimes makes me wonder if that isn't the empty set.
(I mean, apart from gummiboot, the only package in Debian that depends on systemd).
For example?
to the point that if Canonical wanted to continue maintaining consolekit, they needed to find a new name and set up a new repo
Which represented an unsurmountable problem for a poor and underfunded organisation like Canonical.
the intent is to be dependent on systemd
[citation needed]
That's funny, I didn't know I worked for Red Hat.
He said "mum" not "mom". I'm not sure he's an American.
If you want to traverse a tree without recursion you want to check out Morris traversal -- doesn't need a stack.