Re: complaints about systemd
On 10/08/2014 12:39 PM, ael wrote:
I don't know enough to weigh in on this, but I spent the morning
researching the subject and it does seem like this is no small issue. I
myself am deeply troubled by what I read, it seems that cleverness has
replaced level-headedness, wiz-bang technology has replaced simplicity
and transparency, and featureitis has replaced stability. I hope this
gets sorted out. Me, I want my computer to boot reliably, and I
wouldn't care even if it did take 2 seconds longer, and I want to be
able to understand and even edit how it works. But that's just me.
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 03:32:58PM +0200, Michael wrote:
The new system reduces some complexity on one side while introducing much more on the other.
The whole design so far as I can see lacks the simplicity and
transparency that the greatest minds in computer science advocate.
That seems to be confirmed in that systemd is more or less permanently
at least on all my machines. It takes *far longer* to boot up
and particularly shutdown than ever the old init system did.
I have given up even thinking about bug reporting it: what do I say?
Where are the logs that throw any light on the system problems?
Which bug do I report when it changes from day to day?
I suspect that many others are in a similar situation, so that the bug
tracking doesn't reflect the real situation.
All of that said, some of the underlying design ideas are good, but
particulary concurrent systems need that simplicity and transparency, and
the technology to do it exists if little used.