this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2023
328 points (96.6% liked)

Linux

48332 readers
455 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

After a few conversations with people on Lemmy and other places it became clear to me that most aren't aware of what it can do and how much more robust it is compared to the usual "jankiness" we're used to.

In this article I highlight less known features and give out a few practice examples on how to leverage Systemd to remove tons of redundant packages and processes.

And yes, Systemd does containers. :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And it would be cancer because...?

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

Same reason as for all those years these old people are holding a grudge for...

It is not Unix philosophy (nothing is these days), it does not solve any problem they ever had (it does), it is no improvement over what we had before (it is) and even makes some broken and moronic things harder (it does), it is insecure (it improves overall system security), and it is one monolithic blob (it is not). Before systemd nothing depended on the init system (true, but then it did nothing useful that made having such a dependency worthwhile), and before systemd we were all free to use other init systems and distributions did not pick one for their users (they always did, offering additional inits only as unsupported iption just likenthey do now).

That's the typical list you get.

Oh, and it was shoved down all our throats by the mighty Lennart himself, backed by several multi billion dollar companies that brided thousands of distribution developers to destroy Linux (it was not).

Funnily enough it is pretty much the same BS we had when that monster of complexity called sysv init was introduced into distributions, replacing a simple script with a forest of symlinks. Of course the community was much smaller then and so we had a loser number of idiots to shout at everybody else.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

It seems that, in many people's view, it's better to have janky scripts starting systems, having to delegate logging management and service monitorization to the services themselves or cumbersome tools poorly used by most distros such as logrotate? Systemd offers a good thing, easy configuration and IT DOES fix a LOT of issues. People who never tried it won't see how better it is, just try it... like I did 10 years ago.

One of the moments where we see the true power of systemd is when we use it for containers and suddenly realize that the tools used to manage the system such as systemctl and journalctl can be used to inspect and affect a container without even having to enter it. Another equally interesting moment in the systemd journey is when you've an ARM system with 512MB of RAM or even less and you figure out that it will save you precious resources for other things.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The person you replied to is not criticizing systemd he's criticizing systemd detractors.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not at all: I listed the arguments you will get for that question of yours. They all are bogus, as I tried to explain between the parens.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I also updated my reply to make it more clear. It wasn't "aimed at you".