I am not the author.

  • beleza pura@lemmy.eco.br
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    at least this guy recognizes systemd isn’t (just) an init system

    “it attempts to do more” yeah. that’s the point. that’s a good thing. a single source of truth for system background services. background systems used to be a fucking mess and then systemd fixed it. this is why it is the de facto pid 1

    i wish people just quit whining

    • menixator@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      I think if systemd were documented in a more consumable format (the man pages need better organization IMO) more people would see how powerful it is. Mounting directories with BindPath, and BindPathRO, Limiting systemcalls, socket activation and cgroup integration, and nspawn containers are features I can’t live without.

      I feel like a lot of people that get attached to the “It tries to do everything and it’s against the unix philosophy” argument might change their minds when they see the tradeoffs. It has its problems for sure, but you get a lot out of it.

      These days I don’t even use docker containers for running services. I just put it in a systemd service and lock it down as tightly as I can.

      • mr_strange@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s powerfulness IS the problem. Some parts of systemd are great. Some are meh! Some really suck. But because it’s monolithic, you can’t take the good bits and replace the bad. You have to take it all or nothing.

        That’s the problem. Its architecture is offensively bad.

        • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          That’s just completely wrong. Just try e.g. replacing the journald backend with the old text based syslog, and not only will you discover that is possible (which directly contradicts what you just said), it’s also easy!

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Maybe some day after we’re done replacing X11 people will collectively find the will to do something about systemd before it gets too much worse. I wonder which will be easier: Throw it all out and start again, or split it up into parts of more manageable size with well-defined interfaces between them.

  • SavvyWolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    Praise be the Unix Philosophy. May all your projects do precisely one thing, and let they not be tempted by forbidden fruit and do two things.

    • Magiilaro@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      You do know that systemd is modular and every part of it does only one thing? Don’t see a real conflict with the Unix Philosphy