News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by Nursie on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @02:19AM (#18540222)
The hate largely stems from the way it was rolled out - the linux community at large was left feeling like it had been told it would adopt this, and there was no choice, and that rubbed a lot of people up the wrong way.

It's also not 'the unix way' to have tightly bound, large blobs, and the team behind it seemed to take pains to say that lots of other things would rely on it, like udev, so there really was no choice.

So the hate comes from the idealogical side, largely.

Personally, having worked with it, I've rather liked writing service files and timers to get stuff done, it's much quicker to get something up and running than the old system.

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by dvfjsdhgfv on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @02:44AM (#18540332)
> The hate largely stems from the way it was rolled out - the linux community at large was left feeling like it had been told it wold adopt this, and there was no choice, and that rubbed a lot of people up the wrong way.

It wasn't just a feeling, it really was just like that. Had the architecture of Systemd been different, it would have been possible to decouple it from other components and be able too choose an init system just like in the not so distant past. As it is now, practically speaking there is no choice.

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by bayindirh on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @02:50AM (#18540355)
Doesn't Debian support[0] init system switching? Just curious.

[0]: https://wiki.debian.org/Init

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by rosser on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @03:38AM (#18540615)
It does, but packages aren't obligated to provide sysvinit scripts for your non-systemd-using convenience.

Over time, the number of packages that do will fall, because engineer convenience and cognitive bandwidth are incredibly high priorities; "that's the crusty old way while this is the new hotness"; and, "oh, but we need this one little thing systemd offers," &c.

And before you know it, those of us on the ops side are stuck supporting something we loathe, and having to rewrite a bunch of scripting and tooling in response to discovering new and exciting ways the "new hotness" ends up breaking things that worked perfectly well until it came along.

Literally, we're facing another iteration of that very cycle right now: our non-production environment refresh process suddenly fails to complete without being manually thumped at multiple points. Why? System fucking d.

But no: "It works fine for us, so it can't be a problem for anyone else, right? Right?"

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by craigsmansion on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @04:10AM (#18540780)
Debian recently reached out to Devuan for sysvinit maintenance. Devuan has, in spite of a somewhat acrimonious start, delivered what they set out to do, a Debian without SystemD, so it might be worth consideration when dist-upgrading.
Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by bayindirh on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @04:27AM (#18540844)
You're right, I didn't take the scripts part into consideration, also the problem of breaking pipelines is real, there's no doubt about that.

However, dividing teams into developers and (Dev)Ops sides like warring factions is not healthy. I'm also an ops guy (more precisely a sysadmin who supports a lot of users and servers) in my day job, and a I develop stuff for academic world and for my own pleasure in my free time, so I know both sides of the so-called moat.

Using features because they're hot is not also OK for any application, but not using features which can solve real problems is unwise in my book. We also had hacks which were working perfectly fine until systemd came. We evolved, changed how we do things and moved along.

> "It works fine for us, so it can't be a problem for anyone else, right? Right?"

I didn't want to tell or imply anything resembling this. I just gave my own opinion, based on my experience.

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by JdeBP on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @07:09AM (#18541628)
The Debian people were discussing what package maintainers are obligated to provide just a month ago.

* https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911165

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by majewsky on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @04:16AM (#18540803)
> Over time, the number of packages that do will fall, because engineer convenience and cognitive bandwidth are incredibly high priorities; "that's the crusty old way while this is the new hotness"; and, "oh, but we need this one little thing systemd offers," &c.

The thing that many people don't understand about systemd is that they don't have to sell to users or developers, they have to sell to (and design for) distributors. Lennart and Kay know that because they are both working for distributors (Redhat and Suse, respectively).

To distributors, the promise of systemd is the promise of less integration work. It paves over a ton of useless idiosyncracies in distributions (e.g. compare systemd's /etc/os-release with the previous /etc/*-release files that you cannot even call by name because they were called something else on each distribution). Initscripts is the biggest bullet point in that list: Initscripts were always written by the distribution because each distribution had their own scripting layer on top of sysvinit to make it a bit nicer, and each of these was incompatible with those of other distributions. Systemd units, on the other hand, can be maintained by the application developers themselves, and several distros (e.g. the patch-hating Arch Linux) actively pushes systemd units upstream.

When the application developer takes care and has only one target (the de-facto standards forced by systemd), life gets a whole lot easier for distributors. And that's why distributors choose systemd.

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by dvfjsdhgfv on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @08:24AM (#18542066)
Well, it doesn't explain why Debian gave in. They're supposed to listen to the people, aren't they?
Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by bayindirh on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @12:51PM (#18544675)
They have listened to the people. Systemd has selected as a result of a poll [0].

[0] https://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/2013/05/27/systemd-sur...

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by craigsmansion on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @02:03PM (#18545509)
SystemD was selected by the Technical committee, which was very far from unanimous in the decision.

SystemD caused problems at the time and there was no reason not to postpone the decision to Jessie+1, which is what Debian usually does in such cases: "more discussion needed".

Debian broke their social contract, showing that their priority was no longer with their users.

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by bayindirh on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @03:18PM (#18546276)
> SystemD was selected by the Technical committee, which was very far from unanimous in the decision.

I didn't know that. I thought the poll was open to anyone to vote for the relevant time window.

> Debian broke their social contract, showing that their priority was no longer with their users.

Isn't this a little bold claim? AFAICS, the poll has spotted the potential problems and general grievances pretty well (like binary logs, etc.), and concluded that these reservations should be addressed before systemd has included in Debian?

I'm not trying to defend systemd here. As I said in my comments, I disliked it first, and then I learnt and got used to it. My teammates has shown bigger reactions to it, and then they liked it too, after we configured it to behave the way we like. I didn't migrate to systemd voluntarily. It fell from above on me in a pretty hard way.

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by JdeBP on Wednesday November 28, 2018 @04:08AM (#18550210)
If you don't know about the referral to the Debian Technical Committee, then there's a lot that you do not know (including to be wary of threads where "systemd" is mis-spelled "SystemD", as that is a common shibboleth).

There was a whole Hoo-Hah. It was years long. People resigned over it. The votes and discussions are often misrepresented by people recounting the tale. (Common misrepresentations: presenting it as a two-way contest between van Smoorenburg init+rc and systemd, when OpenRC and Upstart were both included, and both favoured over van Smoorenburg init+rc; presenting it as a single vote when there were several, including some votes on Debian General Resolutions by all of the club members; presenting the wiki pages written by the partisans and ignoring the lengthy technical reports from the TC members.)

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by bayindirh on Wednesday November 28, 2018 @12:57PM (#18553827)
I'm aware of the Debian's Technical Committee, but I was unable to follow them all-along during that so-called discussion.

During this period, I was a developer and so-called tech lead of a Debian derivative distro. We were working on some absurd requirement about generating system responses on some events, pulling continuous all-nighters. One day systemd packages arrived to Debian (sid or testing, I don't remember), and using it solved our problem. This is how I became aware that Debian packaged systemd, and it's gonna be the next default init, that's all.

As I said before, I don't blindly support systemd or anything. I'm just using Debian for 14 years or so, and I'm riding on what comes along. I don't have time to devote serious development time to them, however I wish I was able to contribute into Debian or any serious FOSS project. Hmprhf.

Re:BSDs or Illumos may be good alternatives to Linux (2017) by krylon on Tuesday November 27, 2018 @06:28AM (#18541408)
Fwiw, some distros have stuck with different init systems: Void uses runit, Devuan (Debian fork) uses sysvinit, Gentoo uses OpenRC[1]. There are probably more that I am not aware of.

Systemd has not given me any trouble, yet, but I run Void in a VM, and it boots extremely fast.

[1] I believe one can also use different init systems on Gentoo, after all it is Gentoo, but I have not touched it in years, so I do not know for sure.