Severe issues with systemd

Chat about Linux in general
Locked
tsukino
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:02 pm

Severe issues with systemd

Post by tsukino »

I am experiencing 1, 2, 3, 5+ minute delays from "stop jobs" during startup and shutdown for certain services (NFS, etc) despite having installed/uninstalled them properly (software manager).

This is really the last straw in a very long line of technical issues I am having with the new systemd system.

Look, I feel lied to as a user and as an admin because systemd was sold as an init service, and it isn't an init service. Second to that it is actually worse, as an init service, than systemv or openrc. it's slower than openrc and vastly more complex and difficult to maintain than systemv. Oh, yes, it is. See above. It's effectively a black box that I cannot move around so easily. Where it is not, it is exactly a different set of config scripts in a different set of locations. The time spent learning the different locations and names alone has already destroyed nearly a week's worth of my time. I can't keep doing this. For now I need to go back to 17.3 or maybe something like slackware.

I think it's important to have a say, to put in the vote, etc. despite being in a demographic that the mint developers have chosen NOT to target. Because I am in fact a mint user and have been for a very very long time. But if in the future Mint does not include a systemv option (basically so I can handle my own openRC install) I won't use it anymore.

I really really do not care to be told that if I do not install a giant monolithic binary that I cannot use my system. Nothing in the linux world is like this except for systemd and frankly I can think of 100 other ways to do things that are better than systemd (no, really). No, really -- and normally I would say, as a user, I really don't care what goes on under the hood -- except that this has become SUCH a one way street that ***the ability for me to actually go in and experiment and try to actually design a better init system has been removed***.

People who have tried have experienced active hostility from the systemd team to the extent that they have started changing interface code and using unpublished APIs. That alone tells me more than the spider sense I am getting from watching systemd getting rammed down everyone's throats worse than gnome 3. This is pure corporate microsoft/apple bullshit. It's all part of the "better init system" lie. "Here's a great new init system. And look! it's better than... um...... UPSTART." Oh great thanks. Where's the innovation? it's just DIFFERENT and nothing more. In many cases it's a worse implementation of what already existed. Cut it out please. No more systemd. My money is going elsewhere.
User avatar
Pjotr
Level 22
Level 22
Posts: 15207
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:18 am
Location: The Netherlands (Holland)
Contact:

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by Pjotr »

Well, systemd works fine for me.... No problems whatsoever.

Better than its predecessor? For me, no. Worse than its predecessor? Again: for me, no. So I don't care. :mrgreen:
Tip: 10 things to do after installing Linux Mint 20 Ulyana
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 24
Level 24
Posts: 24755
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by xenopeek »

Our LMDE 2 release uses System V init. LMDE 2 is based on Debian 8 (Jessie). While that uses systemd init by default, LMDE 2 does not.
Image
rene
Level 16
Level 16
Posts: 6613
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 6:58 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by rene »

xenopeek wrote:LMDE 2 is based on Debian 8 (Jessie). While that uses systemd init by default, LMDE 2 does not.
I rather doubt that LMDE3 will also not, though.
Cosmo.
Level 23
Level 23
Posts: 17817
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 7:34 am

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by Cosmo. »

xenopeek wrote:Our LMDE 2 release uses System V init. LMDE 2 is based on Debian 8 (Jessie). While that uses systemd init by default, LMDE 2 does not.
Does there exist anywhere a substantiation for that?

Side note: In this comment (topic is the unreliable auto-login) Clem suspected a race condition, which might been tied to systemd.
So suspecting systemd as a origin for problems, which appear at now to be not solvable), is not so far apart. And in this context I wonder, why has it not been replaced for the main edition, although Clem decided to do so for LMDE2?
Might be, that it was easier to do with the Debian-base than with the Ubuntu-base; I cannot judge. But (if this guess should be right) this would not mean, that the suspected problems do not exist.
tsukino
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by tsukino »

rene wrote:
xenopeek wrote:LMDE 2 is based on Debian 8 (Jessie). While that uses systemd init by default, LMDE 2 does not.
I rather doubt that LMDE3 will also not, though.

Thanks xeno. I will take a look.

rene; This is actually a huge problem for me. At this point in my life I am finally ready to wrap up my last project and start giving back to linux in one way or another. I had wanted to throw myself behind some nice fresh indie distro and what not. Linux Mint could be that distro! Kinda.

I had really wanted to tackle the problem of init sytsems myself and I feel incredibly dismayed that it has become impossible for me to do so. What bothers me the most is that there is no innovation going on here, merely a mixing -- a tossing of the salad, if you will -- which is one of the very few things which is irreversible due to it's nature.

What irks me the most is that the first instinct I have when faced with something like an init system is in fact simple shell scripts to start and stop a program, not a program to read config files for the purpose of starting and stopping programs. Part of all this is that I wanted to take a look at a modern production system using SYSV and study ways to improve it incrementally (i.e. in-place) and do as little damage as possible. But that is impossible now. Well, according to xeno there's still LMDE, and of course, Mint 17.3 both of which will be supported for another couple of years. Debian 8 is supported until early 2020 so that might be something worthwhile to look at. Mint 17 until 2019 IIRC...
tsukino
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by tsukino »

Cosmo. wrote:
xenopeek wrote:Our LMDE 2 release uses System V init. LMDE 2 is based on Debian 8 (Jessie). While that uses systemd init by default, LMDE 2 does not.
Does there exist anywhere a substantiation for that?

Side note: In this comment (topic is the unreliable auto-login) Clem suspected a race condition, which might been tied to systemd.
So suspecting systemd as a origin for problems, which appear at now to be not solvable), is not so far apart. And in this context I wonder, why has it not been replaced for the main edition, although Clem decided to do so for LMDE2?
Might be, that it was easier to do with the Debian-base than with the Ubuntu-base; I cannot judge. But (if this guess should be right) this would not mean, that the suspected problems do not exist.
I have also experienced crash-level failures installing Linux Mint. I have a very slow DVD drive because it was cheap and I burned the DVD to very old discs. When I load Linux Mint 18 from DVD it takes 5 to 10 minutes to get to the desktop so I can click on ubiquity (NOT an exaggeration). Occasionally it will fail between boot and desktop, and in fact once early in this process I was unable to autologon as the mint user. It just didn't log in, there was no countdown. (Secondary issue, at the time, I could not logon at a console after CTRL-ALT-F1 or F2....)

Generally though I must say I am extremely happy with linux mint. If I can I think I will just downgrade to 17.3 or go to LMDE2. But rene is right, isn't she? I will have to find another distro anyways for LMDE 3. This doesn't sit well with me. It makes me feel like I am being hunted.
jepo
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 7:54 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by jepo »

tsukino wrote:
Look, I feel lied to as a user and as an admin because systemd was sold as an init service
This is a heavy accusation.
Please tell us who lied to you and when he did that.
The developers describe systemd as follows: "systemd is a suite of basic building blocks for a Linux system".
A suite of building blocks (plural).
Nobody said it's only an init system
and it isn't an init service.
Do you deny that it -among others- provides the capabilities of an init system?
Second to that it is actually worse, as an init service, than systemv or openrc. it's slower than openrc
Citation needed.
Your personal experience with one distro and an arbitrary configuration isn't one, sorry.
and vastly more complex and difficult to maintain than systemv
I guess you don't work as an admin for a very long time? It took away a big pain in the ass, like degenerating, massive bash scripts.

It's effectively a black box that I cannot move around so easily.
What do you mean with "black box" and "move around"? That tells us absolutely nothing.
It's free open source software how is the term "black box" appropriate in any way here?
Where exactly do you want to move what exactly?
Where it is not, it is exactly a different set of config scripts in a different set of locations.

Which config "scripts" are you referring to? System wide unit files which you have to work with as an admin are exclusively under /etc/systemd/system/* as they override any unit file in /lib/systemd/system
I really really do not care to be told that if I do not install a giant monolithic binary

Systemd isn't a monolithic binary at all, that's totally wrong.
Nothing in the linux world is like this
"Like this" means a monolithic binary, which systemd isn't?
Then yes absolutely nothing expect from ...... ah right Linux itself, the actual Linux kernel.... :roll:
except for systemd and frankly I can think of 100 other ways to do things that are better than systemd (no, really).
A lot of people think about a lot of things. The systemd developers have implemented it in code. Did you?
Where's the innovation? it's just DIFFERENT and nothing more.
Absolutely wrong. Please read the documentation and compare its capabilities to SysVinit.
In many cases it's a worse implementation of what already existed.
Which parts of systemd are a re-implementation of SysVinit in which way?
My money is going elsewhere.
All the money you spent to Poettering so far?
tsukino
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by tsukino »

jepo wrote:
tsukino wrote:
Look, I feel lied to as a user and as an admin because systemd was sold as an init service
This is a heavy accusation.
Please tell us who lied to you and when he did that.
The developers describe systemd as follows: "systemd is a suite of basic building blocks for a Linux system".
A suite of building blocks (plural).
Nobody said it's only an init system
Actually it's as I said, it was sold as an init system replacement, it had (and still does not have) any clearly defined scope. The fact that it is now described as libuserspace is completely irrelevant. You would have had to be around when it was introduced to understand that I guess.

There are a number of other troubling misconceptions in your post but cutting through all the noise, my problem is basically the 15 minute startup and shutdown times from stop jobs, and a host of miscellaneous smaller issues like not being able to change the number of TTYs or their font or resolution anymore. There are probably even solutions for these problems -- as I said -- using a number of admin commands which are different from the admin commands I know, or by editing the config scripts -- all of which are named differently, in different locations, and with different formats that what I am used to. That's all fine I don't really care. I just wish the easiest way out of all of this was not installing Slackware, Gentoo, or (shiver) BSD. I'll be giving LMDE2 a try later tonight and see if I can get around the stop jobs problem with my fileserver.
User avatar
Pjotr
Level 22
Level 22
Posts: 15207
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:18 am
Location: The Netherlands (Holland)
Contact:

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by Pjotr »

Note that systemd is where nearly all of the developers' attention is going.... It's pretty likely that not much maintenance will be done on the old stuff. Also, more and more other (third-party) software will rely on systemd being present.

Whether you like it or not, systemd appears to be the future. Fast further improvements on systemd in the near future are likely, given the amount of developers' attention.
Tip: 10 things to do after installing Linux Mint 20 Ulyana
Keep your Linux Mint healthy: Avoid these 10 fatal mistakes
Twitter: twitter.com/easylinuxtips
All in all, horse sense simply makes sense.
jepo
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 7:54 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by jepo »

tsukino wrote:
jepo wrote:
There are a number of other troubling misconceptions in your post but..
No, please enlighten me, I've got time. As somebody who literally contributed code to systemd and may do so in the future, I think I should be informed about my misconceptions about this particular software, that would be of great help and avoid possible mistakes on my part based on that lack of understanding.
User avatar
Portreve
Level 10
Level 10
Posts: 3089
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:03 am
Location: Florida

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by Portreve »

tsukino wrote:I am experiencing 1, 2, 3, 5+ minute delays from "stop jobs" during startup and shutdown for certain services (NFS, etc) despite having installed/uninstalled them properly (software manager).

This is really the last straw in a very long line of technical issues I am having with the new systemd system.
Well... according to this article on without-systemd.org, there's actually a fair number of distros which do not use systemd.

That said, the only practical way you're probably going to get what you want is for there to really be a huge schism in the GNU+Linux community along the lines of Gnome 2 / Gnome 3. Otherwise, I think the handwriting is on the wall here.

In a way, it's sort of ironic since the libre world is supposed to be about freedom of choice, and this sure doesn't seem like it, at least to someone like myself who lives strictly on the sidelines.

I wouldn't take too seriously any anger coming out of systemd developers' mouths, any more than I'd take seriously what came from the Gnome Project team, or even the X11 team. All three of these fundamental areas for GNU+Linux had fallouts and, no doubt, seriously hurt feelings and ruffled feathers. Heck, Linus Torvalds even (unwittingly) drove a dev nearly to the point of suicide.

Yet, the community has stood tall and is still here today.
Please remember to mark your fixed problem [SOLVED].

Running Linux Mint Cinnamon 20.0.

Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
— Voltaire
tsukino
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by tsukino »

Pjotr wrote:Note that systemd is where nearly all of the developers' attention is going.... It's pretty likely that not much maintenance will be done on the old stuff. Also, more and more other (third-party) software will rely on systemd being present.

Whether you like it or not, systemd appears to be the future. Fast further improvements on systemd in the near future are likely, given the amount of developers' attention.
Well that isn't really true (developer's attention) there is certainly significant opposition to it. But that isn't what I am trying to draw out. Also I am suspicious about anything being sold as something I have absolutely no choice in running. But that isn't it either. Let me put it another way. Where in the code of systemd do I turn off stop jobs? I want to introduce a kludge in my system so that when I reboot my computer and my wifi is down or my synology box is powered off I do not encounter 15-20 minute startup times.

That kind of wait is actually so unacceptable that I really would need to switch distros because of my work environment and I really really do not want to do that. but being completely honest if I had known it would take over a week of workdays to solve this and other random issues like apache not working anymore because systemd (long story, fixed in about 3-4 hrs) I might have just run to lmde2 first. I just dont want to get bitten on the ass anymore from this. It's too big of a waste of time.
tsukino
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by tsukino »

jepo wrote:
tsukino wrote:
jepo wrote:
There are a number of other troubling misconceptions in your post but..
No, please enlighten me, I've got time. As somebody who literally contributed code to systemd and may do so in the future, I think I should be informed about my misconceptions about this particular software, that would be of great help and avoid possible mistakes on my part based on that lack of understanding.
Try to understand what my problem is and give me a solution. Again -- can you tell me where in the systemd code I can turn off the idiotic stop jobs thing? Thanks.
tsukino
Level 1
Level 1
Posts: 11
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:02 pm

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by tsukino »

Portreve wrote: Yet, the community has stood tall and is still here today.
Thanks for your response. I don't think this is a community effort tho. This is coming out of corporatespace. Red hat, with the us military as a customer, and canonical and others, would absolutely love to make linux "their" os and compete with apple and microsoft directly. Hey I get it, they want to make money and they're passionate about making linux BETTER! Yeah! Ok nothing wrong with that. But they cannot do this directly because of the GPL. They're not just hackers contributing to oss anymore they're corporations who are legally mandanted to make money. They are actually legally not allowed to work on oss "for the sole purpose of improving the software". They can only legally contribute to OSS when it is a secondary goal towards them making money. How is this reflected in practice? In practice they have discovered that they control the mainstream "market" for linux because they control the distributions (because they have the best user experience now). This is why people have said "gee, red hat and canonical did it, I guess we will too". In practice, by requiring a completely different set of knowledge and skills, breaking backwards compatability, and forcing everyone to use their system they have in fact forced more people to use their software and their corporate agenda will move forward. Linux is now effectively a corporate-produced OS which is going to be competing with microsoft and apple (and google, I guess). But I am not sure this was intentional, just a result of the corporate mindset being applied onto linux space. I mean, I don't think it's a "direct" conspiracy. But they certainly don't give a pennyrub about doing things the linux way. They're not allowed to make money when things are done "the linux way".

I think it's great that systemd is not necessarily a bad thing. Maybe we need this kind of organization. Look at BSD, and look at dolphin and what apple did to MacOS. This can be a good thing. Maybe this is what linux needs to compete with apple and microsoft -- to become a similar type of OS just like them. Windows and MacOS contain a lot of new stuff we have learned in computer science over the last fifty years. Yes we did learn a lot, about metaphors and user experiences and how things work and what people basically need and what they don't. Some of that conflicts with what we have inherited in linux from unix systems. But from the standpoint of computer science we also learned how new things should be implemented to ease the burden of software engineering. This is something that is taught to those who are responsible for code other people will have to work on. Corporate software engineering is totally different. The only thing they care about is user experience, and how they get there is not relevant. In fact they would prefer if you didnt see their code anyways. This is why a lot of corporate code simply sucks, and sucks badly. This is why you couldn't have more than 10-15 tabs open in firefox on windows 7 even up until a few years ago, without the entire system randomly locking up or going into snail mode. Because the system was not designed it was thrown together. This is why backwards compatability gets broken. But everyone loves the user experience. I think this is like, what do you call it, gresham's law of OS design. Bad corporate code pushes good community code out of the system.

From the community's standpoint, you have to look at the underlying system. It's a system which is basically fine the way it is, and you want extra functionality placed on top of it (which is fine) you can look at the system first before breaking backwards compatibility. That way when something goes wrong there is an established way of fixing things. You know, take "baby steps". Do things in an incremental fashion. The boring line bandied about regarding the "unix way" is not "the unix way" like there is vanilla and chocolate and rum raisin. It's the basic way computers work on a c-based system. On the other hand, you have the corporate whizzbang way which is 100% new and improved and always a complete rewrite from the ground up containing loads of new features. Yes, this is exactly what systemd is, it looks and walks and talks exactly like a duck, and the same sort of duck salesmen wearing duck salesman suits are pushing it around town.

So whats the problem with the ducks. Duck meat is yummy. The problem is that there was a scandal where ppl found out that they were using poor quality or expired cooking oil to prepare these ducks. So what normally wouldn't be an issue actually ends up causing incredible problems and now there's no easy way out, no easy way to say "I don't want this stuff on my system" without also removing stuff that was easy and standard just a year or two ago. Did you know I can't use my HP LaserJet printer on Gentoo without installing dbus, avahi, python, and a handful of other weird stuff I haven't even heard of? Last year it was fine. On slackware it's fine. I feel upset about this mainly because I am not really running a "Linux" system anymore in the sense that I was running a "Linux" system last year or two years ago. What I am running now is much more akin to macos than linux. I want to run a "linux" system because I actually like to "understand" exactly what my computer is doing at any moment. The stories of nohup getting broken and kill -9 getting broken and stuff like udev and mount and logind getting sucked up by systemd and systemd now doing dns and exposing an internal web server are the kind of horror stories that you expect to read about windows and mac and has actually been the kind of thing pushing me away from windows and mac over the years, to linux.

But this is no longer about a technical issue I am having. This is about me being forced to install an update that screws with my system and turns it into something I didn't want and I am being told by red hat and canonical that I am an idiot with OCD if I do not run their software (yes they said that). Come on.
User avatar
xenopeek
Level 24
Level 24
Posts: 24755
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2011 3:58 am
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Severe issues with systemd

Post by xenopeek »

And with that you've had your 5 minutes on the soap box. If you need help with a technical issue you're most welcome to ask for it.
Image
Locked

Return to “Chat about Linux”