Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 50

Thread: OpenSUSE: Not Everyone Likes SystemD

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gururise View Post
    Those two feature requests you linked two would probably affect less than 0.1% of the Linux population. I suppose you have two choices:

    1. Stick with SysVinit.
    2. Add those features yourself to SystemD

    You can't really fault Lennart Poettering for not adding a feature that would only benefit a very very small portion of the users.
    1. How, if most distros will switch to it sooner or later as user space components become dependent on it??
    2. Are you crazy? Lennart Poettering can as well say, "go f*ck yourself and maintain your patches separately forever" (Ulrich Drepper also from RedHat is notoriously known for that).

    I love Open Source. I really do.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    591

    Default

    I must wonder why it seems that almost all people that are against systemd are uncivilised lunatics. Just earlier today I was reading a topic on Arch Bang forums... I thought these people can't be for real. But hey, Phoronix doesn't disappoint either: useless bolding, use of exclamation marks and bad language on the first page.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    714

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by balouba View Post
    In a more or less funny way, it's actually similar to pulseaudio. Me too, I liked the pulseaudio features and decided to close my eyes on the inherent design issues. Few years later, I'm using pure alsa, because pulseaudio design issues and complexity just annoy the hell out of me.
    Pulseaudio makes doing things much simpler. Managing my own asoundrc for all my different devices is a nightmare and can't do half of what PA does for me.

    Trying to do what is REQUIRED audio management without using Pulseaudio leads to massive headaches for everyone involved. Trying to accomplish the same things without it leads to very significant complexity and nightmares. People who think that this sort of stuff doesn't matter only have a extremely narrow use case that they are willing to consider.

    Sorry, but I have to say, f*ck Lennart Poettering and f*ck systemd. systemd has become a single point of failure, a Swiss army knife which once getting broken renders your system completely unusable. That's f*cking wrong. That reeks of bad incompetent design decisions.
    If your kernel doesn't work then your system doesn't boot either. That's a single point of failure.

    I guess Linux was always shit design from the beginning, right?

    Oh wait, yeah. You have no idea what you are talking about.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    San Bernardino, CA
    Posts
    231

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birdie View Post
    And BTW, systemd itself can leave your system unbootable (!!) - go ask Fedora 18 testers - they will surely demonstrate to you their anger.

    A technical reason why systemd sucks big time?

    Try to boot your system the old init = /bin/bash way, you won't be able to do anything with it, as udev was replaced with systemd and systemd cannot run when it's not a system init process.

    That's called broken by design.

    Sorry, but I have to say, f*ck Lennart Poettering and f*ck systemd. systemd has become a single point of failure, a Swiss army knife which once getting broken renders your system completely unusable. That's f*cking wrong. That reeks of bad incompetent design decisions.
    I don't understand your point. There are many 'single points of failure' in Linux or any system. If the kernel gets b0rked, your system will fail (ie. a single point of failure). If your hard-drive is messed up, that too, is a single point of failure. Generally, personal computers are not designed to be fully redundant systems (yeah, I know about RAID). I've had messed up SysVinit scripts that have also prevented my system from booting properly.. so I don't see your 'broken by design' argument.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pennsylvania, United States
    Posts
    1,860

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birdie View Post
    And BTW, systemd itself can leave your system unbootable (!!) - go ask Fedora 18 testers - they will surely demonstrate to you their anger.
    Fedora 18 hasn't even hit Alpha yet... You're running essentially running Fedora-Rawhide until the package-freeze hits, which gets updates as quickly as ArchLinux-testing or Debian-Experimental. Your system WILL break. Systemd WILL have bugs that didnt come up. There WILL be system-breaking package conflicts. You should not TOUCH Fedora-Rawhide on anything except a dedicated testing machine or a Virtual Machine.

    I'm not saying systemd is perfect, I ran F17 when it first came out and there were problems. I had systemd randomly breaking on boot for one reason or another. That being said, I moved to Arch for awhile, also used systemd there, and had no problems so I assumed that updates to systemd were fixing the bugs I was hitting, and thats apparently true because I've been running F17 on my desktop/server for a month or so now and everything's been running perfectly fine.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teho View Post
    I must wonder why it seems that almost all people that are against systemd are uncivilised lunatics. Just earlier today I was reading a topic on Arch Bang forums... I thought these people can't be for real. But hey, Phoronix doesn't disappoint either: useless bolding, use of exclamation marks and bad language on the first page.
    Thank G-d you are Holier than thou!

    I bow before your humbleness. That's the western way of debate, people are invested, that's not like Japanesey 'debates' where it seems no one disagrees, and thus everyone is happy cuddling themselves. It's even stronger in the FOSS community since people just do whatever, hierarchy is commit access, everyone is free to work the way they want, and most people want to keep it that way.

    So it's not even close to an "us vs them" mentality, it's just plain stupid to try and force things since the sole principle of FOSS is that people's own effort is based on choice. This mentality that you can force people to be happy is pure fantasy, just like forcing systemd or really, anything! Your argument is as flawed as your logic, cuddle&be_happy would be a pretty sight but it is, objectively, unreal. We can't solve problems with love and Thai massages, and specially in a would-be free environment the most important freedom is always freedom to dissent.

    But hey! I am sure it's being taken way for our own good, so it's cool huh?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,597

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Teho View Post
    I must wonder why it seems that almost all people that are against systemd are uncivilised lunatics.
    It doesn't seem. They are. I don't think i've seen anyone even try to raise an argument on the technical side of things.

    BTW my two favorite arguments are: "It was designed by Lennart" and "Its not the unix way" And i seriously can't decide which is the most stupid.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Perth, Scotland
    Posts
    435

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by birdie View Post
    And BTW, systemd itself can leave your system unbootable (!!) - go ask Fedora 18 testers - they will surely demonstrate to you their anger.

    A technical reason why systemd sucks big time?

    Try to boot your system the old init = /bin/bash way, you won't be able to do anything with it, as udev was replaced with systemd and systemd cannot run when it's not a system init process.

    That's called broken by design.
    systemd doesn't replace udev as such. udev has become part of systemd but it can still be used standalone. When I build udev on Gentoo, it unpacks the sources from the systemd tarball. I have often booted with init=/bin/bash but even I'm not sure how you start udev manually. It doesn't matter these days because now we have devtmpfs to populate /dev early in the boot process.

  9. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chewi View Post
    systemd doesn't replace udev as such. udev has become part of systemd but it can still be used standalone. When I build udev on Gentoo, it unpacks the sources from the systemd tarball. I have often booted with init=/bin/bash but even I'm not sure how you start udev manually. It doesn't matter these days because now we have devtmpfs to populate /dev early in the boot process.
    Sorry, it has already replaced udev in Fedora 18. In Fedora 18 there's NO udevd binary (at least I couldn't find it - and if it's located in /usr/libexec - that's yet another lame design decision - it's *not* a helper, it's an independent system daemon).

  10. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ericg View Post
    Fedora 18 hasn't even hit Alpha yet... You're running essentially running Fedora-Rawhide until the package-freeze hits, which gets updates as quickly as ArchLinux-testing or Debian-Experimental. Your system WILL break. Systemd WILL have bugs that didnt come up. There WILL be system-breaking package conflicts. You should not TOUCH Fedora-Rawhide on anything except a dedicated testing machine or a Virtual Machine.

    I'm not saying systemd is perfect, I ran F17 when it first came out and there were problems. I had systemd randomly breaking on boot for one reason or another. That being said, I moved to Arch for awhile, also used systemd there, and had no problems so I assumed that updates to systemd were fixing the bugs I was hitting, and thats apparently true because I've been running F17 on my desktop/server for a month or so now and everything's been running perfectly fine.
    I have tested numerous alphas and betas of Windows XP, Vista and Windows 7 since XP was called Windows Neptune and believe me or not, it has always booted successfully.

    It's really frightening that Open Source aficionados say that the kernel, init system, X.org or desktop environment can become unusable/unbootable/broken.

    I have no words to describe how insane that statement sounds. Or maybe you, people, don't care about Linux as a real replacement for Windows or Mac OS? It surely looks so.

    "It can break, it's by design, Linux is alpha quality software."

    Wow, wow, wow. I'm gone and disappeared in disbelief.
    Last edited by birdie; 09-10-2012 at 01:59 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •