Why systemd is a bad thing?

Why systemd is a bad thing?

Attached: PRor7gvw_400x400.jpg (400x400, 7K)

Other urls found in this thread:

suckless.org/sucks/systemd/
serverfault.com/questions/755818/systemd-using-4gb-ram-after-18-days-of-uptime
phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=systemd-2017-Git-Activity
suckless.org/sucks/systemd
web.archive.org/web/20170724100245/https://muchweb.me/systemd-nsa-attempt/
without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd
github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

because that's the title you get when you're not a good thing, honey

it isn't.

it's not exactly *the* bulletproof solution for all init related issues, but it solves a fuckload of them.

suckless.org/sucks/systemd/

No.
/thread

Attached: fe1ac7d2-cce7-4820-8efc-5d982603269b.jpg (1058x1711, 176K)

because the person behind it is an ultra-sensitive manlet

The problem with systemd is that it was created by Poettering. Autists don't like his personality so they try to crucify his software.

It has insane defaults and can brick motherboards that use an EFI. Reposting from the Void thread:

It's just a big buggy clusterfuck. It can be convenient at times but the cons outweigh the pros, at least for home use. I do use OpenSUSE Leap on my work laptop but I find myself rebooting once a week because systemd uses up several GB of RAM, which is retarded. There's probably a memory leak somewhere in that million+ lines of spaghetti. Linux is built for servers, so I don't know how this bullshit is even allowed. Maybe there's a way to clear out the used memory and I just haven't learned how to use it, but it should do this automatically and not eat up 2-3GB of my RAM.

Help! Systemd let me flash my BIOS! This is all systemd's fault!

My openpepe leap machine has an uptime of over a week without any systemd abnormalities.

Mounting EFI vars as read/write by default is objectively retarded. There is no debate on this point.

Systemd's problems ultimately boil down to the fact that Poettering is an arrogant prick. It started as a good replacement for other init systems but it has grown to cover things that are far outside the scope of an init system and the tight integration of systemd means replacing these components is very difficult. Compounding this issue is the fact that Poettering shifts responsibility for bugs as often as possible and basically ignores all feature requests even if they are valid and useful.

There is debate on this point. If the manufacturer followed the EFI specifications, then you can change or delete it all you want and nothing bad should happen. The EFI was not meant to be static.

Systemd doesn't claim to be just an init systemd. It's a modular set of tools and distros are happy to ship all of them because they are objectively better.

He makes mistakes in bug reports but that doesn't mean systemd is bad the way many Jow Forums posters imply.

>ultra-sensitive
OK
>manlet
You shouldn't make fun of someone for something out of their control

There's a LOT of reasons why people don't like it, and I think the people who don't like it all likely have their own reasons for not liking it.

Here's a posting about someone discovering a massive memory leak that used up 4GB of ram. While I have yet to see something this massive, I have definitely noticed Systemd using more memory than the alternatives, and some leakage here and there as well.
serverfault.com/questions/755818/systemd-using-4gb-ram-after-18-days-of-uptime

Some see it as an unnecessary security risk due to its massive attack surface. It recently hit 1 million lines of code.
phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=systemd-2017-Git-Activity

Some don't like it because they dislike its habit of scope creep. The project ends up assimilating things that historically should not have anything to do with init. gif related.
suckless.org/sucks/systemd

There's also some other design decisions that people have an issue with, such as using Google DNS by default (because of course systemd can handle DNS), using binary logs, etc.

Lastly there's the conspiracy theory side of it, which alleges that systemd is an NSA attempt to compromise GNU/Linux, and due to Systemd as a project moving way too fast, it can't be properly audited.
web.archive.org/web/20170724100245/https://muchweb.me/systemd-nsa-attempt/

For more links and arguments, see:
without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd

Attached: Systemd_anigif.gif (200x133, 772K)

to expand upon the DNS issue, pic related

Attached: SystemdDNS.jpg (1432x1700, 785K)

and for the cherry on top, the infamous motherboard bricking

Attached: fucksystemd.png (1280x2084, 619K)

systemd's tools are far from """""modular"""""

When has any manufacturer ever followed specifications to the letter? What purpose is there in mounting EFI vars as read/write by default? The vast majority of users have no reason to ever change them, and the ones that do should be competent enough to remount them as read/write.

Systemd was initially created as an init system, like I said. It did that job well, better than the competition at the time. Over time it has added components and responsibilities it did not need to take on, because Poettering wants to reshape Linux to his specifications. There are definitely distros which have shied away from some of systemd's features.

>Mounting EFI vars as read/write by default is objectively retarded. There is no debate on this point.

maybe for you retard. proper efi systems don't have problems with EFI vars being completely wiped out anyhow.

thanks lennart

Journald and udev are dependent on the init. That's out of 70 binaries.

EFI boot managers used to be the only way to boot Linux on a Mac and other computers that don't offer a legacy boot option. Also it's maybe mandatory for secureboot. For why it was not readonly by default, I would agree that it's generally bad practice but you needed root to change it and no one expected a computer to get bricked by changing the EFI because the standard said it was safe. I blame the manfacturer because they didn't follow the spec.

see as an example of the retardation of systemd

k dipshit. not everyone has shitty chinkware. EFI vars need to be read/write to support shit like fwupdmgr and other firmware related boot time changes. even a "not systemd" system would have to deal with this problem and you can simply namespace the EFI mount read for everyone but who needs it anyhow. but you're a fucking retard and don't know shit about modern linux.

Why russians always put noun before adjective/verb?

>namespace the EFI mount read
Is this a new meme or are you really this fucking retarded.

Attached: br.jpg (1280x720, 102K)

Bro just fuck off already. All you do is fukin flame people on Jow Forums all the time.

Imma filter your ass

Flame people?

Its some guy that thinks hes a fucking Linux guru that has some weird fetish for calling everything a namespace. Its comedy gold.

fucking pajeets

vekin in the house reckin shit again

>I don't know what FS namespacing is

this is literally how retarded you are.

You absolutely can not defend that usage. He literally uses namespace as a verb to describe changing something to read only.

This is beyond pajeet tier english fuckery.

God I fucking hate him so much.

I really do love the convenience of SystemD though.

Yu are surgeon now.
You have to do surgery.
Instead of scalpel they hand you a smart-chainsaw with an always on internet connection, a camera, a HTTP webserver, a thermostat that controls your house, an android operating system, a netflix app, and wireless keys for your car. Instead of pulling the string it has to boot up but thats okay because it only takes 5 minutes.

huge security risk
with what we know you shouldn't place your trust in anything related to poettering

basically because he's paid to close the linux environment down.
you can screencap this, sooner or later redhat will pull the plug, and all the other distros will die.

Yes. Other non-systemd distros are being suicided right now.

because Microsoft offers a better quality product and has better customer service than Red Hat

Lennart.
It's amazing how one person can make a software stack so repulsive.

>init freedom
>not free to choose systemd
Defend this

systemd is faster so that analogy doesn't work.

YEAH LOL

I fucking hate redhat they totally created pulseaudio to destroy all Linux audio support wololol I'm right guise trust me.

If you couldn't tell, I'm making fun of you because you think they are doing the opposite of what they are doing.

Attached: makebelievesign.jpg (525x463, 58K)

they are a for profit company
and you have a real fag's identifier

This, (((Poetering))) has already fucked us with systemD so much, and my gentoo works perfectly with OpenRC, so I don't need to switch.

Attached: 2018-06-20-074528_7680x4320_scrot.jpg (7680x4320, 3.85M)

Linus Trovalds has said a couple snarky things about systemd, and people just parrot whatever he says. I've never had a problem with it.

Attached: 408d999ac344c811b51a61348661866b9dad56e8.jpg (251x201, 6K)

It's the other way around. Systemd is a bloated mess and I've never had a problem with the init system I've had for the past 10 years.

And how is this related to the actual project?

I notice everyone complaining about systemd and no-one mentions the even bigger cancer Red Hat put out.
SELinux, now that is one big piece of garbage.

It's not. The only valid argument is it violates the UNIX philosophy, but in the case of systemd the benefits outweigh that

Why do people think that hating on things that >just werk make them look cooler.

OpenRC just werks and I don't see anyone shitting on it

The benefits of the ideal might outweigh it, but the benefits of anything as it pertains to reality sure don't.

>doesn't werk
>don't use
>wow hipster

how is OpenRC btw? I've used both Systemd and Runit, and prefer Runit overall for its speed, lightweight nature, and simplicity as an init system/service manager.

SELinux wasn't made by Red Hat, and it's by far the best MAC system with some degree of support on Linux systems
AppArmor is the one made and pushed by RedHat, it doesn't even really work and it's vulnerable by design making it useless in comparison to SELinux
It's like a middle ground between runit and systemd before it became metastatic cancer

It results in issues like this, where a genuine security issue gets marked not-a-bug and had potential to not get fixed. I want to say it ended up getting fixed because he acknowledged a separate bug that stemmed from the one reported, but still considers the initial action of logging an error if a username started with a number and then continuing to run the service as root to be okay.
Mind you, a username starting with a number is POSIX compliant, but because redhat and a few other distros make a wrapper around useradd to prevent it, obviously it must not be valid.

github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237

What the hell is the point of not allowing that?

Remounting EFI vars as read/write can be done from cli, so it can be done as part of the process of updating firmware. There is no reason EFI vars should be mounted read/write by default, this is literally indefensible.

>but you needed root to change it
And you should need root to do anything that would affect EFI, which includes anything that should be modifying EFI vars, ergo readonly should be the default and any other default configuration should not be considered sane.

Nah SELinux isn't a RedHat thing and while it can be annoying as fuck to debug and configure it does its job very well.