"So we move inland and lose Florida and Brussels." thats all well and good but a lot of the major cities in the world will be flooded as most of them are on rivers or close to the sea so there will trouble ahead.
"None of us (you, me, them, us) will be around when what you describe happens." Unfortunately that's why its not taken seriously, its the same for evolution deniers, it takes too long to happen so it's not really happening.
"No, we wouldn't be riding horses." yes we would if you apply the "If something works, then don't break it." premise, the horse (or camel etc) did the job. Cars were crap for a long time before they got reliable and comfortable.
"SystemD, whether it's amazing or not, is equivalent to a car salesman coming up to you, shooting your horse, forcing you to buy a car (from him), then leaving." - the car salesman would say if you don't like what we're selling, go elsewhere. if you don't want systemd in your life, you move to another distro that doesn't use it.
" I don't want systemd on any server I manage right now because I can't trust it. " - nothing wrong it that but you should do research into systemd to find out what it really does/doesn't do before relying anything the anti-systemd posters say.
""Things move on, you cannot stay in one place" - is 64k enough for you, are you still using 8inch floppy disks or did you move on?
"As a friend put it; the linux kernel uses a monolithic architecture but a modular construction, systemd uses a modular architecture but a monolithic construction." - your friend needs to look up the definition of monolithic (and so do you if you believe his definition). Systemd is a collection of separate executables not a single one so is therefore modular.
I'm afraid that blog definition is crap as well. to say some is monolithic because it has a dependency, you will need to label all programs that depend on something such as glibc monolithic as well. This blog's definition of monolithic is a very lame attempt at being disparaging which is usually the case when the arguments are weak.
"many here have complained about the lack of code quality." - mmmm i'd be surprised if everyone agreed on whats good and bad in coding
"You have to run yet another syslog to even get text logging, and it's a second-class citizen" - journald logs before and after when syslog can be launched/stopped so it performs more logging than syslog which i would say is a good thing. at least if configurable you can still have syslog.
"It exists purely due to Lennart's NIH syndrome, and for no other reason" - so if systemd was written by someone else, then systemd would be fine? quote "Eventually Red Hat realised that the problems we solved with Systemd were relevant, and were problems that needed to be solved, and that you couldn’t ignore them"
"There's nothing wrong with using scripting to make things happen" - there's nothing to stop you using scripts to launch everything (with few exceptions), just configure systemd to run them.
I'll finish that quote for you.. "Eventually Red Hat realised that the problems we solved with Systemd were relevant, and were problems that needed to be solved, and that you couldn’t ignore them."
"Such criticism of systemd is bullshit, period." - unfortunately some people just won't get it, they'll eventually bury themselves in the hole they dig around their feet. they stretch bullshit too far, maybe they are standing in a field of bulls and can't smell anything else
"Then why did it not handle it before, assuming you mean it has to handle it as journald does now. If it worked without it before then it is not a requirement." journald starts logging long before and after when syslogd could log which is useful (unless you think it isn't of course).
"Why does init have to handle ntpd?" - it's a configurable option not mandatory.
"If something works, then don't break it." - we'd all still be riding horses on that premise. Things move on, you cannot stay in one place.
no-one has to use systemd but if you use a distro that uses it, then its upto you to uninstall it and install your own version of an init system otherwise it would be like me going to buy a Jaguar and telling them "i'm pissed off because i can't have a Mercedes engine in it as a choice"
the choice that everyone has is install a distro that doesn't use systemd, its simple.
Thats just your entrenched interpretation because you won't change your mind no matter how much evidence is given to you, do you also believe the earth is 6000 years old?
You cannot turn it off but you can configure journald to throw away its data and configure syslogd to work as normal for you . so its not the issue you make it out to be
The parallelism that systemd developed was for the benefit of those that create and kill instances of Linux all the time so fast booting is necessary and i guess thats part of a system administrators task list (and it benefits desktop users as well).
Everything in the systemd package is configurable except journald and udev so you can configure any other network stack etc you want etc, you are not forced to use anything apart from systemd, journald (which you can ignore and use syslog instead) and udev. Move to RHEL7 when its suits you but you'd best start getting to know systemd, its not the monster alluded to by trolls.
its only a big issue for "some" admins, the ones that haven't really done any research into what systemd can/cannot do.
Slashdot Mirror
"So we move inland and lose Florida and Brussels." thats all well and good but a lot of the major cities in the world will be flooded as most of them are on rivers or close to the sea so there will trouble ahead.
"None of us (you, me, them, us) will be around when what you describe happens." Unfortunately that's why its not taken seriously, its the same for evolution deniers, it takes too long to happen so it's not really happening.
the evidence... the evidence.... or do you ignore it?
"No, we wouldn't be riding horses." yes we would if you apply the "If something works, then don't break it." premise, the horse (or camel etc) did the job. Cars were crap for a long time before they got reliable and comfortable.
"SystemD, whether it's amazing or not, is equivalent to a car salesman coming up to you, shooting your horse, forcing you to buy a car (from him), then leaving." - the car salesman would say if you don't like what we're selling, go elsewhere. if you don't want systemd in your life, you move to another distro that doesn't use it.
" I don't want systemd on any server I manage right now because I can't trust it. " - nothing wrong it that but you should do research into systemd to find out what it really does/doesn't do before relying anything the anti-systemd posters say.
""Things move on, you cannot stay in one place" - is 64k enough for you, are you still using 8inch floppy disks or did you move on?
"As a friend put it; the linux kernel uses a monolithic architecture but a modular construction, systemd uses a modular architecture but a monolithic construction." - your friend needs to look up the definition of monolithic (and so do you if you believe his definition). Systemd is a collection of separate executables not a single one so is therefore modular.
bollox, you just grabbing at straws
I'm afraid that blog definition is crap as well. to say some is monolithic because it has a dependency, you will need to label all programs that depend on something such as glibc monolithic as well. This blog's definition of monolithic is a very lame attempt at being disparaging which is usually the case when the arguments are weak.
"many here have complained about the lack of code quality." - mmmm i'd be surprised if everyone agreed on whats good and bad in coding
"You have to run yet another syslog to even get text logging, and it's a second-class citizen" - journald logs before and after when syslog can be launched/stopped so it performs more logging than syslog which i would say is a good thing. at least if configurable you can still have syslog.
"It exists purely due to Lennart's NIH syndrome, and for no other reason" - so if systemd was written by someone else, then systemd would be fine? quote "Eventually Red Hat realised that the problems we solved with Systemd were relevant, and were problems that needed to be solved, and that you couldn’t ignore them"
"There's nothing wrong with using scripting to make things happen" - there's nothing to stop you using scripts to launch everything (with few exceptions), just configure systemd to run them.
He certainly has a better understanding of systemd than you do, he's actually read up about it.
I'll finish that quote for you.. "Eventually Red Hat realised that the problems we solved with Systemd were relevant, and were problems that needed to be solved, and that you couldn’t ignore them."
"You sure do like creating false dilemmas dont you?" - sorry, i can't beat you at that.
"Leave the logging and console and other stuff alone." - other daemons do that work, not systemd e.g. journald, consoled.
Why can't scripts be launched parallelly? - why don't write some using Bash and see how it works.
the evidence is all out there, do some research on systemd. a few people have tried to point things out to you but you won't change your mind.
However all you do is give half truths - eh? thats your stance, pot kettle black
"Such criticism of systemd is bullshit, period." - unfortunately some people just won't get it, they'll eventually bury themselves in the hole they dig around their feet. they stretch bullshit too far, maybe they are standing in a field of bulls and can't smell anything else
no, systemd and journald are 2 daemons not one. if a journal was being created without journald and directly from systemd then you will have a point.
yes, that is correct unless you hate systemd then it monolithic. they don't have hardly any real arguments against systemd so they make them up.
"Then why did it not handle it before, assuming you mean it has to handle it as journald does now. If it worked without it before then it is not a requirement." journald starts logging long before and after when syslogd could log which is useful (unless you think it isn't of course).
"Why does init have to handle ntpd?" - it's a configurable option not mandatory.
so whats your stance on "glibc"? How many programs are dependent on a version of glibc?
Systemd does startup,
journald does logging,
ntpd is configurable option
- so try again
journald is its own daemon (the "d" on the end gives it away) so try again.
"If something works, then don't break it." - we'd all still be riding horses on that premise. Things move on, you cannot stay in one place.
no-one has to use systemd but if you use a distro that uses it, then its upto you to uninstall it and install your own version of an init system otherwise it would be like me going to buy a Jaguar and telling them "i'm pissed off because i can't have a Mercedes engine in it as a choice"
the choice that everyone has is install a distro that doesn't use systemd, its simple.
Thats just your entrenched interpretation because you won't change your mind no matter how much evidence is given to you, do you also believe the earth is 6000 years old?
you need to update yourself on journald and what you can do with it. you can config the system to run rsyslog as per normal.
You cannot turn it off but you can configure journald to throw away its data and configure syslogd to work as normal for you . so its not the issue you make it out to be
The parallelism that systemd developed was for the benefit of those that create and kill instances of Linux all the time so fast booting is necessary and i guess thats part of a system administrators task list (and it benefits desktop users as well).
Everything in the systemd package is configurable except journald and udev so you can configure any other network stack etc you want etc, you are not forced to use anything apart from systemd, journald (which you can ignore and use syslog instead) and udev. Move to RHEL7 when its suits you but you'd best start getting to know systemd, its not the monster alluded to by trolls.
its only a big issue for "some" admins, the ones that haven't really done any research into what systemd can/cannot do.