Systemd

why people hate systemd?

Attached: d3w3f.jpg (638x359, 41K)

Other urls found in this thread:

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/11502
github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11436
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Because it's shit.

why

If only that diagram were anything like reality. Make it 100 times bigger with shit strapped on like DHCP, DNS, logging, all in incredibly poorly written C running as root.

Because it is.

and why it is

Attached: systemd.png (750x850, 823K)

I don't hate it. Installing and activating D-Bus, consolekit and acpid manually sucks, and never had any issues when using systemd.

NPCs.

>using a 1 million loc service manager that tries to be your entire OS
the absolute state lelnuxcucks

no sysadmins in this thread confirmed

/thread

* It takes longer to boot than the alternatives since it has to resolve dependencies every startup.
* It randomly stops responding, so deamon restarts fail, as do the normal shutdown/reboot commands; so you have to run "systemctl reboot --force --force --force" to restart.
*journald dies and stops processing logs if anything even looks at it funny.

The first point is negligible; in my environment systems reboot so infrequently, I wouldn't care if they took an hour to boot.

The second and third are large pain points. When you are dealing with 30k machines, those "can never happen" bugs crop up all the time, and you have to deal with them. Since Debian moved to systemD, we've had to add many checks and procedures to catch when systemD fucked up, and drain/reboot the machine.

What's even more annoying, is the problem rate doesn't appear to be dropping.

Because it is... shit.

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

>binary logs,

Binary logs wouldn't be a big deal if they gained anything from the change. As far as I can tell, they sacrificed the ability to read the logs without specialized tools, in exchange for making them more fragile and unreliable.

The goals they listed; transaction oriented logs, external metadata, etc; don't require binary logs. Look at rsyslog's spool format. It's weird and verbose; but perfectly readable with any tool.

Every argument against systemd ever

it's leaking again oh god oh fuck

Attached: 1548013517897.jpg (225x225, 5K)

* there is a 50/50 chance it will take down the network before unmounting network file systems

I just ran "ldd /sbin/init | wc -l" on a debian 9 system.

There were 33 libraries listed; most of which appeared to be non-hardened normal libraries, as opposed to code having the strict limitations you would expect critical code to have,

a stop job is running for session c1 of user user (2s/1m30s)

why people hate cancer?

boot time with openrc: 5s
boot time with systemd: 2m5s

I think people just hate Linux userland.
I want New/Linux

What kind of linux distro you guys are using to run your shit? That never hap...
> Debian
Never mind. I thought we were talking about professional ones.

To be fair. The alternatives don't have a good way to "enforce" a universal pattern to manage services. The old RC is fucking kid's work. Literally a bunch of shit C and bash routines that spawn process.

Gentoo doesn't use it.

systemd defense force is here
>first point
Socket activation literally removes the requirement of dependency management altogether. For the services that don't get socket-activated, there's dependency caching, even OpenRC has that shit figured out.
Indexing and being able to reliably filter logs, think systemctl status of any service.
systemd is faster for me on Gentoo. Maybe your OpenRC boots less stuff?
Optional, and it works really well.

OpenRC is better on Gentoo. I've tried other distributions that force systemd. It's trash compared to Gentoo's default.

Main reason? Because it wasn't optional (shut up, you know what I meant) and forced down everyone's throat. The very thing that drives people who like Linux/Open Source up the walls.

i never reboot my computer, for me memory and trust usage most impotant

github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11502
Even better
github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/11436
"Not every facet of program behaviour is guaranteed to be stable."

you're asking for a list of symptoms, but the problem comes from the mindset of its author: he's sloppy and loves complexity, and the fruit of that shows up in his work

Need reasons, fren?

>modules are inter-hard-dependent so if a random module fails the whole fucking S.O might break
>monolithic code = maintenance is a pain = bugs much more likely
>does way more than an init system does, thus making it not only bloated by default but also laggy when it comes to booting
>has shown some very concerning leaks from time to time
>has shown some above average exploitability
>is being forced and shoved in everyone's asshole

SystemD makes the maintainer's life easier but it may not be as benefical to the end-user.

Only real issue I have with it is that it generates logfiles in binary as opposed to simple textfiles and that the code base sometimes is quite a mess of patches. Other than that it's okay-ish but I hate it for trying to bring monolithic philosophy into Linux.

oh shit my /gpol/ just kicked in (yo)
is the purpose of systemd to deter us from good design by lumping good ideas with bad ones so we'll use the bad to hate the good?
imagine a userspace designed around some of the principles of systemd but not all of them -- can you pick a good subset?
is pottering Jewish?