To use some analogy, imagine I, a non-cook, have been invited to a restaurant by friends. After the meal I say to the waiter "this food is way too salty!", and he replies, "Oh yeah, then go in the kitchen and replace our cook!".
What, you think we all don't have dayjobs and can just devote our time to...
1) learn to code C/C++ 2) learn about the OS 3) architect, code and debug a replacement
? Please don't be an absolutist and think "everyone can contribute to open source!", in the real world, time is finite.
Plus, isn't this the great thing about open source? If someone doesn't like systemd, they can write they're own. Of course, not one does..
> What, you think we all don't have dayjobs and can just devote our time to...
I'm only suggesting this to the people who comment online complaining how the most used implementation isn't up to their personal standards and that they know how it could be done better.
It's easy to complain and bitch online, that's the problem. Everyone seems to know the solution but no one seems to do it.
> Please be advised, I've downvoted your comments asking "if you know better, where's your code?"
Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.
I upvoted you because you downvoted me.
I try not to get personal so normally I'm not downvoted for that at least, just being wrong heh.
I may not know how to cook (insert complicated dish here) but I can tell if it's too salty. Users of systemd / whatever software this man wrote may not have the time to do all the stuff I mentioned, but they know using/configuring the system is a nightmare.
> It's easy to complain and bitch online, that's the problem. Everyone seems to know the solution but no one seems to do it.
I repeat, they might not know the solution, just that the software tastes bad to them. Some of these complainers might be able to come up with a better solution, if they had the 3 things I mentioned before, but sadly, apparently, no one actually does. Otherwise a replacement would already exist. Of course it's another thing to get distros to adapt it.
Their lack of time/ability doesn't mean they're forbidden to say "this thing sucks!". IMO at least.
> Wow, are we insulting people like we're twelve now?
How is that insulting? It's pretty much true. It's not really nice, but it's not really mean either.
> Why are you not writing a replacement for systemd?
There are already replacements. I use them in several places, mostly openrc. I'm perfectly allowed to grumble that something's bad and pushed into most distros. Plus, I'm generally stuck using it at work.
Next time you complain about, say, your car breaking down, I'll be sure to advise you to go build your own car.
That's the point. It's not insulting and it makes you sound like you're twelve.
> Next time you complain about, say, your car breaking down, I'll be sure to advise you to go build your own car.
No, again. I see you're struggling. When my car breaks down, I ring a mechanic or take it to the garage. I don't go to the mechanic claiming to know exactly why my car broke down and how the manufacturer should change the specification to make it so that it doesn't break again. If my car keeps breaking down, I know not to use that model of car and try something else.
What you're doing is most likely using a piece of software, finding it doesn't suit your particular use case and then going online to insult the creator, and claim that you know how it should have been engineered.
It's completely fine that you don't like systemd. The problem is that a majority of people prefer it and that's pretty obvious from the distributions picking it up.
Stop and think for a while, imagine that's you who's created the software. Do you really think he's an evil genius trying to fuck up your system or is he just a hacker doing what he loves to do?
You also say "They also didn't do a great job of modularity, and don't use dbus like they should (dbus isn't built to be used with an init system; use a socket already). Rather, they have every thing depending on another. Suddenly, everything must re-tool to work with systemd or stop working. It basically unilaterally declared itself the standard.", but don't really have anything to back it up.
For example, Arch Linux reasons for picking up systemd:
0) it is hotplug capable
1) we can know the state of the system
2) it is modular
3) it allows dbus/udev to go back to doing the task they are meant to do
4) we can reduce the number of explicit ordering dependencies between daemons
5) we get a lot of security/sandboxing features for free
6) systemd service files can be written and distributed upstream
7) systemd is a cross-distro project
8) logind will finally deliver on what consolekit was supposed to do
9) systemd is fast
Not sure why it declared itself as standard.
We weren't using that model of car. Until the mechanic, during routine maintenence[0], attemped to steal our cars and replace them with Pintos.
0: Outside the metaphore: during 'apt-get upgrade' et al.
> That's the point. It's not insulting and it makes you sound like you're twelve.
> What you're doing is most likely using a piece of software, finding it doesn't suit your particular use case and then going online to insult the creator, and claim that you know how it should have been engineered.
It's not insulting, but I'm "insulting the creator"? What exactly are you contending?
> It's completely fine that you don't like systemd. The problem is that a majority of people prefer it and that's pretty obvious from the distributions picking it up.
No, "most people" don't necessarily like it. There are things it does better, and things it does worse. How is a piece of software to improve if every one comes out of the woodwork to white-knight for it when some one criticizes it?
> [you] don't really have anything to back it up.
Dbus stands for desktop bus [0]. It's stated purposes are communicating between desktop applications and between the desktop and OS [1]. It is not built to do low-level init stuff during bootstrapping or within the init itself, hence the name Desktop bus.
I stated that systemd has ~70 binaries; I was off by one. It's 69 binaries [2]. Though, that's a 2013 source; it's taken over other things since then, so I'm sure it's more.
With respect to incompatibility: you now have to use journald. You can forward, but that's additional hassle and more potential breakage. See [3] for more.
Over all, I'd appreciate systemd if I could do one thing: remove everything but the actual init stuff. As far as I'm concerned, there are better options for most of the other stuff.
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Bus
[1]: https://dbus.freedesktop.org/doc/dbus-tutorial.html#whatis
[2]: http://0pointer.net/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html
[3]: https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/Incompatib...
If you tried to insult me, but I didn't find it insulting, you would still have gone online to insult me even though I didn't find it insulting.
> No, "most people" don't necessarily like it.
False, you're not 'most people'. Every main distribution has picked it up. You're living in a bubble perhaps.
> woodwork to white-knight for it when some one criticizes it?
Oh god, now the white-knight defense? Come on, your argument starts okay and then you say absolute rubbish like this. I fail to see how calling some programmer a moron is going to help improve systemd.
> It is not built to do low-level init stuff during bootstrapping or within the init itself, hence the name Desktop bus.
It started that way, but that's no longer true. Some could argue that systemd allows dbus to go back to what it does best. Before dbus was being use to start long running daemons, etc.
> With respect to incompatibility: you now have to use journald.
Very valid reasons for this, this video[0] conviced me but perhaps you won't be swayed.
[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1lUeQVYuNs
Anyway, thanks for not getting personal in the comments. All the best.
Wow, are we insulting people like we're twelve now?
Again, I have to ask. Why are you not writing a replacement for systemd? Again, another person in this thread seems to think they know everything yet don't seem to have any code to show for it.