this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
888 points (98.7% liked)

linuxmemes

21612 readers
1600 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 2 years ago
    MODERATORS
     
    you are viewing a single comment's thread
    view the rest of the comments
    [–] snake_case_lover 35 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    What do you expect from an init system? It's like saying my cpu is infectious because my computer depends on it

    [–] [email protected] 36 points 8 months ago (3 children)

    It's that it also decided to take over log management, event management, networking, DNS resolution, etc, etc.

    If it were just an init system that would be perfectly portable. People were able to write software that way with sysv for years.

    It's that in order to do certain low level tasks on a systemd system, you need to integrate with systemd, not just "be started by it". Now if a distro wants that piece of software, it needs to use systemd, and other pieces of software that want to be on that distro need to implement integration with systemd.

    A dependency isn't infectious, but a dependency you can't easily swap out is, particularly if it's positioned near the base of a dependency tree.

    Almost all of my software can run on x86 or arm without any issues beyond changing compiler targets. It's closer to how it's tricky to port software between Mac and Linux, or Linux and BSD. Targeting one platform entails significant, potentially prohibitive, effort to support another, despite them all being ostensibly compatible unix like systems.

    [–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

    log management, event management, networking, DNS resolution

    and this is a bad thing? the distro can choose to not use it, but because every systemd distro uses it, it's a 1000x easier to implement it without needing to put a fuck tons of if-else's for every distro

    [–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    No, not everyone thinks it's a bad thing. It is, however, infectious, which is a reason some people don't like it.

    Knowing why people dislike something isn't the same as thinking it's the worst thing ever, and liking something doesn't mean you can't acknowledge it's defects.

    I think it's a net benefit, but that it would be better if they had limited the scope of the project a bit, rather than trying to put everything in the unit system.

    [–] [email protected] -4 points 8 months ago

    and what's the problem?, it's not like everything is in the same binary or it's a monstrosity that can't be used without using every single feature, it's a project that just has different programs under the same project name, because no one wanted todo theoe programs

    [–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

    That’s why I personally try very hard to only rely on POSIX stuff, even when it’s massively inconvenient. The only thing I haven’t gotten around to replacing yet is GNU make.

    [–] [email protected] -4 points 8 months ago

    Bro I’m with you on this but the systemd bots will just keep arguing with and downvoting you. Don’t bother.

    [–] [email protected] 18 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    I think the init system is the best part of systemd. It is sooo easy to use. You don't have to write the same complicated shell script for your software like everyone else. You just give systemd the path to your executable and that's basically it. It does the rest and you don't have to worry about PID files or forking the actual software. Systemd basically runs it like you did while developing it.

    I think what people don't like are all the other parts of systemd that seem to be tightly coupled. I don't know if it is even possible to run just the systemd init without any other systemd package.

    The last time I got angry at systemd was when resolvd did some DNS shit I did not approve of.

    [–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

    I may be wrong but I believe that all of the systemd programs are decoupled. You can run the systemd init system without any resolved or networkd. They just happen to be used by default on a lot of distros.

    [–] Deckweiss 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

    I expect it to not run a stop job for 90 seconds by default every time I want to quickly shut down my laptop. /s

    [–] snake_case_lover 12 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    it doesn't run a job it waits for your jobs to end. You can set the default want time. Its the same thing on windows that asks programs to close before shutting down. If a critical application got stuck systemd has nothing to do with it

    [–] Deckweiss 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

    I know what it is. But it literally says "A stop job is running" and since english is not my first language, I had no good idea how to better express the technicalities of it in a short sentence.

    As for it having nothing to do with systemd:

    I am dual booting arch and artix, because I am currently in the middle of transitioning. I have the exact same packages on both installs (+ some extra openrc packages on artix).

    • About 30% of the shutdowns on arch do the stop job thing. It happens randomly without any changes being done by me between the sessions.

    • 0% of the shutdowns on artix take more than 5 seconds.

    I know that I can configure it. But why is 90 seconds a default? It is utterly unreasonable. You cite windows doing it, but compare it instead to mac, which has extremely fast powerups and shutdowns.

    And back to the technicalities, openrc doesn't say "a stop job is running", so who runs the stop job if not systemd?

    [–] [email protected] 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

    The question you should be asking is what's wrong with that job which is causing it to run for long enough that the timeout has to kill it.

    Systemd isn't the problem here, all it's doing is making it easy to find out what process is slowing down your shutdown, and making sure it doesn't stall forever