Re:Systemd 250 Released
by 3np on Friday December 24, 2021 @01:39AM
(#29670984)
I don’t follow how a new startup/system management architecture makes it “not UNIX”. We do put OS X in the UNIX column, after all. POSIX and all that.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy
Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface.
AFAIK none of these describes systemd.
Re:Systemd 250 Released
by diffeomorphism on Friday December 24, 2021 @05:50AM
(#29672509)
That seems to describe systemd extremely well. Lots of little tools like networkd, homed, journald... that do one thing, do it well and work together. And using text+time stamps.
AFAIK the systemd parts don't have well-defined interfaces. At least I've never seen any independent replacement of any of those small parts, as opposed to replacement of whole systemd.
Do you browse the web like `curl | render-http`? UNIX philosophy is not a law. For complex problem domains separating it into multiple parts is not always possible and only makes the whole thing more complex. System init is quite a complex problem domain.
I browse the web using Firefox, i.e., extendable browser with a huge number of plugins. Unix philosophy is not a low. It's a rule helping to make computing understandable, robust and extendable.
I don’t see why something that is derived from UNIX has to have to the UNIX philosophy.
Here’s a thought I haven’t evaluated fully: can the same thing be said about the Linux kernel?
At the end of the day I think some of the major points of criticisms of systemd (moving fast and breaking things for example) are valid, however I still see it as a net gain. Fortunately there are distros like Devuan, OpenWRT and Alpine for those who want something different.