Switch to SystemD
Forum rules
Do not post support questions here. Before you post read: Where to post ideas & feature requests
Do not post support questions here. Before you post read: Where to post ideas & feature requests
Re: Switch to SystemD
Have you used systemd? I'm using it on my Arch Linux install and much prefer it to the old SysV init. Together with journald, it's all easier to manage. I feel (my opinion) that a lot of flack is given to systemd based on that it works differently, because long ago learned things now have to be relearned. Anything new has a learning curve. Looking at the user side and what it does for the user, I much prefer it. I don't see Linux Mint switching to it, as Ubuntu is bound to Upstart. But perhaps if Debian switches to systemd...
30 biggest myths about systemd is an informative read: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html
30 biggest myths about systemd is an informative read: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html
Re: Switch to SystemD
Will be interesting to see if Debian adopts to SystemD.. Though still dont think Mint will as they follow ubuntu closely unless ubuntu scraps upstart... that said im sure its possible to switch but i dont know what that would entail... Might be too much work to remove one and install another
Re: Switch to SystemD
I was talking about LMDE, which of course follows Debianjs3915 wrote:Though still dont think Mint will as they follow ubuntu closely
Re: Switch to SystemD
There is talk about debian moving from init, so LMDE may move.
I had more problems with init because of daemons not starting leading to the whole boot process halting.
Also, start-up with systemd in Arch is around 15 seconds for me, where startup in Mint is much longer (at least double that of Arch on the same hardware, or so it feels).
I had more problems with init because of daemons not starting leading to the whole boot process halting.
Also, start-up with systemd in Arch is around 15 seconds for me, where startup in Mint is much longer (at least double that of Arch on the same hardware, or so it feels).
Re: Switch to SystemD
I know this discussion is a little bit old, but it appears that both Debian and Canonical will be moving to systemd: http://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/2014/02/ubun ... ng-systemd
Re: Switch to SystemD
Yeah... perhaps if billions of flies are all going on $h1t, they can't be wrong!But perhaps if Debian switches to systemd...
Re: Switch to SystemD
Hi all,
I just ran across this about SystemD. Sounds like Linus is really really pissed off.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=n ... px=MTY1MzA
larry
I just ran across this about SystemD. Sounds like Linus is really really pissed off.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=n ... px=MTY1MzA
larry
Re: Switch to SystemD
It's not news quoting Linus, unless he's pissed off... Count me the number of articles you've seen where Linus wasn't pissed offTimberbeast wrote:Sounds like Linus is really really pissed off.
Anyway, if you've read that you'd know this is conflict with one developer--not with systemd as a whole. As a regular user this doesn't affect you at all (it's about the debug boot parameter).
Re: Switch to SystemD
Unfortunately, Debian has already confirmed they're moving to systemD, so it won't be long before Ubuntu does.mmix wrote:IMHO, systemd must not be used.
http://boycottsystemd.org/
mdev is udev alternative.
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev
Unless you're into stripping your system down and building initscripts or OpenRC for yourself.
Re: Switch to SystemD
Mark Shuttleworth already confirmed this back in February 2014 but exactly when the switch would take place is still undetermined:clfarron4 wrote:Unfortunately, Debian has already confirmed they're moving to systemD, so it won't be long before Ubuntu does.mmix wrote:IMHO, systemd must not be used.
http://boycottsystemd.org/
mdev is udev alternative.
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Mdev
Unless you're into stripping your system down and building initscripts or OpenRC for yourself.
http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316 ("Losing Graciously")
And associated media pick ups on above article (quick Google search: "Mark Shuttleworth on switching to systemd")
https://www.google.com/#q=mark+shuttlew ... to+systemd
I don't think we'll see this anytime soon as it's pretty clear that the Mark isn't pushing for a rapid transition to systemd. Ultimately, it's up to the Ubuntu Tech board to decide on how to implement this. If they were smart about it, they'd take their time (within reason and feasibility) and implement the switch in stages rather than try one massive rewrite.
"Humph. Choice, it is the quintessential Linux delusion, simultaneously the source of it's greatest strength, and it's greatest weakness." (All apologies to The Architect)
Re: Switch to SystemD
Ubuntu will follow Debian on systemd adoption. Debian is already making good progress, but yeah it will likely take a while before it becomes default in Ubuntu (you can already install it though).kmb42vt wrote:I don't think we'll see this anytime soon as it's pretty clear that the Mark isn't pushing for a rapid transition to systemd. Ultimately, it's up to the Ubuntu Tech board to decide on how to implement this. If they were smart about it, they'd take their time (within reason and feasibility) and implement the switch in stages rather than try one massive rewrite.
In any case, with Linux Mint staying on Ubuntu 14.04 package base till mid 2016 and LMDE possibly moving to Debian stable--you're not likely to see systemd as default on Linux Mint soon.
Re: Switch to SystemD
In Debian Testing systemd is the default init system already.
Re: Switch to SystemD
When Ubuntu switches to systemd, when Mint adopts it, too (in a way that infringes on freedom), I will be looking for another distro.
I have used slackware (really ancient), Debian (90s, reliable, it was my firewall), Gentoo (00s -- emerge is not always your friend), Ubuntu (dabbled -- but they lost me after Gnome2 went away) and now Arch. I came upon the systemd controversy after lots of the flames had flown and after it had already caused me a bunch of pain (I wonder if some of my on-going pain isn't a result of it as well but I'm currently blaming heat and hardware on that front).
systemd's advocates promise all kinds of things -- and admittedly my LaserJet1020 printer has been slightly (but only very slightly) easier to keep running in a systemd world, but not by very much. "Quick booting" isn't why I came to Linux. I consider it an undesirable feature actually. I'd like the boot to go at a speed where I can just barely keep up with the dmesg lines going by -- whenever I'm forced to do a full re-boot, like on a kernel upgrade, that is. It gave me a sense for the health of my system and if the shape of the message stream changed it functioned as a canary -- either of more change than I thought I had adopted, or of something going/gone wrong.
I say the following with no personal animus, just a feeling that "The Art of Unix Programming" was never read and taken fully to heart by the people who wrote and decided to adopt systemd:
1. I question the wisdom of a 40Mb program running as PID1. It's bloat-ware at the one place there should be no bloat. Speaking from a security point of view, it's a set of broad attack surfaces that we shouldn't put up with.
2. Anyone who doesn't like scripts (as L.P. has stated he does not) shouldn't be writing a PID1 program. Not liking script is a sign of failure to be enculturated in the Unix Way -- go back and read the Rootless Root: "Three pounds of Vax!"
3. Anyone who cares that PIDs climb up into the thousands during boot up (as L.P. has stated that he finds distasteful) shouldn't be writing a PID1 program. Who cares! All those little processes were wonderful in their moment: they started, they did their work, they died ... and they left clear messages about what they did so that if anything went wrong we can figure it out -- even if the logs are in 5 different places, the single fact that they exist as text files that we can use less and grep on is a treasure beyond words.
4. Responding to "Corrupt Journal file" as a bug with "RESOLVED-WONTFIX" is so wrong-headed, language fails me (to be clear: not an FS journal, all logs in a systemd world go into the journal, accessed through journalctl).
5. Log files trapped in a binary journal that you can't read unless your system is running is even worse.
6. And haven't enough people been hurt by Pulse Audio [for the record, I haven't, but tales of woe from this corner are so common that they give me cause for caution] that we should be far more cautious about accepting anything else from the same people? Even I have my besetting idiocies -- I just don't insist on imposing them on whole communities and then callously ignoring the complaints.
So, when a version of Mint adopts systemd to the deprecation or exclusion of others, I will go quietly into the night. Even if sysvinit can't hotplug the way somebody wants it, too (I hadn't noticed a problem myself), there's got to be a more Unix-like way to do it than systemd.
I admire Mark Shuttleworth's calm tone in his piece on "losing gracefully". He's acting like an adult in the sense of not getting het-up about this issuse, where "all around are losing theirs". But I also think that the nose entering the tent, claiming to be that of a camel (a necessary, useful animal in some settings, if really frustrating and annoying notwithstanding) really belongs to a basilisk and the time for torches and pitch-forks (double-entendre there, absolutely intentional) is only just beginning.
(mis-quoting a 70s rock tune) Hold the line! It's not always 'bout booting time... ank
I have used slackware (really ancient), Debian (90s, reliable, it was my firewall), Gentoo (00s -- emerge is not always your friend), Ubuntu (dabbled -- but they lost me after Gnome2 went away) and now Arch. I came upon the systemd controversy after lots of the flames had flown and after it had already caused me a bunch of pain (I wonder if some of my on-going pain isn't a result of it as well but I'm currently blaming heat and hardware on that front).
systemd's advocates promise all kinds of things -- and admittedly my LaserJet1020 printer has been slightly (but only very slightly) easier to keep running in a systemd world, but not by very much. "Quick booting" isn't why I came to Linux. I consider it an undesirable feature actually. I'd like the boot to go at a speed where I can just barely keep up with the dmesg lines going by -- whenever I'm forced to do a full re-boot, like on a kernel upgrade, that is. It gave me a sense for the health of my system and if the shape of the message stream changed it functioned as a canary -- either of more change than I thought I had adopted, or of something going/gone wrong.
I say the following with no personal animus, just a feeling that "The Art of Unix Programming" was never read and taken fully to heart by the people who wrote and decided to adopt systemd:
1. I question the wisdom of a 40Mb program running as PID1. It's bloat-ware at the one place there should be no bloat. Speaking from a security point of view, it's a set of broad attack surfaces that we shouldn't put up with.
2. Anyone who doesn't like scripts (as L.P. has stated he does not) shouldn't be writing a PID1 program. Not liking script is a sign of failure to be enculturated in the Unix Way -- go back and read the Rootless Root: "Three pounds of Vax!"
3. Anyone who cares that PIDs climb up into the thousands during boot up (as L.P. has stated that he finds distasteful) shouldn't be writing a PID1 program. Who cares! All those little processes were wonderful in their moment: they started, they did their work, they died ... and they left clear messages about what they did so that if anything went wrong we can figure it out -- even if the logs are in 5 different places, the single fact that they exist as text files that we can use less and grep on is a treasure beyond words.
4. Responding to "Corrupt Journal file" as a bug with "RESOLVED-WONTFIX" is so wrong-headed, language fails me (to be clear: not an FS journal, all logs in a systemd world go into the journal, accessed through journalctl).
5. Log files trapped in a binary journal that you can't read unless your system is running is even worse.
6. And haven't enough people been hurt by Pulse Audio [for the record, I haven't, but tales of woe from this corner are so common that they give me cause for caution] that we should be far more cautious about accepting anything else from the same people? Even I have my besetting idiocies -- I just don't insist on imposing them on whole communities and then callously ignoring the complaints.
So, when a version of Mint adopts systemd to the deprecation or exclusion of others, I will go quietly into the night. Even if sysvinit can't hotplug the way somebody wants it, too (I hadn't noticed a problem myself), there's got to be a more Unix-like way to do it than systemd.
I admire Mark Shuttleworth's calm tone in his piece on "losing gracefully". He's acting like an adult in the sense of not getting het-up about this issuse, where "all around are losing theirs". But I also think that the nose entering the tent, claiming to be that of a camel (a necessary, useful animal in some settings, if really frustrating and annoying notwithstanding) really belongs to a basilisk and the time for torches and pitch-forks (double-entendre there, absolutely intentional) is only just beginning.
(mis-quoting a 70s rock tune) Hold the line! It's not always 'bout booting time... ank
Re: Switch to SystemD
systemd counts up to about 4 MiB for me, not 40. That's including everything that is systemd; PID1 is just 1.7 MiB.
As for reading the journal while your system isn't running, you can tell journalctl to read the journal from another location (like your hard disk while booted from something else):
-D DIR, --directory=DIR
Takes a directory path as argument. If specified, journalctl will operate on the specified journal directory DIR instead of the default runtime and system journal paths.
Re: Switch to SystemD
Shenanigans has been appropriately been called on me. I should have checked this fuzzy memory on my (not now reliably functioning) arch system (with systemd) to check it. The true size is still 20 times bigger than /sbin/init, so my over-all point about excess size and attack surface still stands even if the file size differs by an order-of-magnitude.xenopeek wrote:systemd counts up to about 4 MiB for me, not 40. That's including everything that is systemd; PID1 is just 1.7 MiB.
Okay, so you don't need the target system's systemd to be running but this is still a far cry from being able to call less on log files, the gold standard for this kind of thing, not to mention the persistent reports that even a non-filtering invocation of journalctl takes several times as long as invoking less.As for reading the journal while your system isn't running, you can tell journalctl to read the journal from another location (like your hard disk while booted from something else):-D DIR, --directory=DIR
Takes a directory path as argument. If specified, journalctl will operate on the specified journal directory DIR instead of the default runtime and system journal paths.
So, i will accept the slight modifications to my points -- thanks for the good data, xenopeek, but I'm afraid I don't hold myself answered. ...ank
Re: Switch to SystemD
I'm just clarifying on the misinformation your post had. I didn't see a question in your post.ansak wrote:but I'm afraid I don't hold myself answered
As for speed of journalctl, what retention policy have you setup in /etc/systemd/journald.conf? I initially had a slow journalctl also, but I tweaked retention period to be shorter (2 months) and cleared up older files from /var/log/journal (run journalctl --update-catalog after deleting files). journalctl is now as snappy as can be--and it's using less as a pager by default BTW. Even piping journalctl into grep is no problem speed wise.
You can probably tweak it in other ways also. As noted in the manpage, you can even disable it (Storage=none) and output would go to the syslog daemon if you have that installed.
Anyway, you've already made it clear you are going to leave Linux Mint over systemd. For the Unix Way; have you considered BSD. Linux isn't Unix, BSD is.
Re: Switch to SystemD
I didn't pose a question that required "answers". I posed mis-givings about the decision which were not answered. The only answer I got was:
But if that's the answer all Linux distros give me, then perhaps that's my only option if I feel so strongly about systemd. Thank you for your tmie.
(cue track 8 from the Proclaimers, Hit the Highway...) ...ank
For the record, "The Unix Way" was just as much a part of the Linux world as the BSD world.xenopeek wrote:Anyway, you've already made it clear you are going to leave Linux Mint over systemd. For the Unix Way; have you considered BSD. Linux isn't Unix, BSD is.
But if that's the answer all Linux distros give me, then perhaps that's my only option if I feel so strongly about systemd. Thank you for your tmie.
(cue track 8 from the Proclaimers, Hit the Highway...) ...ank
Re: Switch to SystemD
Hello, please forgive my naiveté.
But would it not be possible to offer different versions of the O/S one that uses init and one that uses system?
I must admit that some of the articles I've read about system speak very badly of it. One called it the Linux equivalent of svchost in Windows, I process I'm not a fan of I must admit.
I take the view that if I can see a process, I can learn about it. I can't do that if they are hidden by something like svchost.
My thanks for anyone taking the time to explain things to this noob
But would it not be possible to offer different versions of the O/S one that uses init and one that uses system?
I must admit that some of the articles I've read about system speak very badly of it. One called it the Linux equivalent of svchost in Windows, I process I'm not a fan of I must admit.
I take the view that if I can see a process, I can learn about it. I can't do that if they are hidden by something like svchost.
My thanks for anyone taking the time to explain things to this noob
Re: Switch to SystemD
This topic started out as a suggestion early last year;
Those wishing to discuss the merits or demerits of systemd, can do so in the Chat about Linux forum.
The topic has been drifting recently and I've had to delete some comments from people just coming here to kick up controversy with misinformation. With the decision made both by Debian and Ubuntu to migrate to systemd, which Linux Mint 18 and LMDE 2 will follow, the original suggestion has been answered. Hence locking this topic.hal8000 wrote:As a suggestion I'd like to see a future realease of Mint switch from Upstart to SystemD.
Those wishing to discuss the merits or demerits of systemd, can do so in the Chat about Linux forum.