Re: complaints about systemd

 

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

Lets have that in Debian please? 

Dean 

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

> On 17 October 2014 18:51, Ray Andrews <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/17/2014 02:38 PM, Christopher Browne wrote:
>> 
>> On 9 October 2014 19:49, Lennart Sorensen <[email protected]> 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 [1]
>> 
>> 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.
> https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem [2]
> 
> 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?"
 

Links:
------
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd
[2] https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem