[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: complaints about systemd

I think BSD style init is underrated. Controlling everything in rc.conf is wonderful :)

Lets have that in Debian please?





On 2014-10-21 11:28, Christopher Browne wrote:

On 17 October 2014 18:51, Ray Andrews <rayandrews@eastlink.ca> wrote:
> On 10/17/2014 02:38 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
> On 9 October 2014 19:49, Lennart Sorensen <lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 09:25:23AM -0700, Ray Andrews wrote:
>> > Can *anything* justify creating a problem that can't be debugged?
>> I suppose that this invalidates one of the functionality claims that was part
>> of the basis for adoption...
>> Specifically...
>> https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd
> Well, they certainly write a glowing review of themselves, do they not?
> That's a very well written and convincing doc, but it does seem that not
> enough attention has been paid to the issues that have been raised here.

Well, it stands to reason that when they were promoting the notion of being
a replacement for SysVInit, they'd put the best face forward.

And everybody *did* get opportunity to put a face-of-choice forward.

While I wasn't keen on Upstart getting chosen, I think the page they prepared
describing the merits of moving from SysVInit presents good points well.

> On my system I get strange messages about 'start jobs' and 'stop jobs' which
> come with one minute, thirty second countdowns.  I don't know why it has to
> be 90 seconds, would 60 seconds not do the trick? 30 seconds just totally wrong?

Based on the sales job that quotes startup time as 1 second, for there to be
something that takes more than 1 second seems like a severe matter.

> Still, the big question is: are these fixable glitches and bugs, or do they point
> to those deeper, fundamental problems that we've talked about?
> But, to be devil's advocate: One thing about the systemd doc above that struck me
> as a sound argument was that starting a service is ... starting a service, and that
> whereas that mostly happens at init, it makes sense that whatever code/method
> is used to do it at init may as well be used generally. No?
Unfortunately, the current goings-on seem to risk being free of technical content,
and fodder for flame warring.

I guess I find myself displeased with certain technical points
(e.g. - claims of 1s boot time, that seem invalidated), but I'm usually finding
things working on my systems that have SystemD.  So far, I can't establish, from
my own observations, that "different" == "bad".

When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"

Reply to: