Devuan, anyone?


 


Neelix said:
Linux-SWAT said:
Frankly, why should I like something that I dislike ? Why should I be forced to use something that I don't need ?
Click to expand...
I never suggested you should.   I've no experience with systemd at all,  so have nothing to base an opinion on other than hearsay.   Most of the arguments I've heard against it however were things that ultimately don't make a lot of difference to the end user. (or they don't have to)  You're the first person criticising it that I've come across whose argument wasn't just that they disliked it on principle. (for any number of ultimately inconsequential reasons)  You implied that you've tried it, but didn't like it, hence my wondering why.      Thanks for your answer.

-Neelix
Click to expand...
At present I am still trying to learn the differences, so I am learning new commands and what is doing what.  I guess this falls into the "new/unfamiliar" category that TrashyMG mentioned, and yes, it has been annoying for me, slowed me down, and caused some problems since I lack some fairly basic knowledge again.

Something along these lines has happened to me as well:

slaeshjag said:
The only major annoyance I've had with systemd is that it throws me into an emergency shell whenever it can't mount a disk under boot, without telling me why. It used to just hang systemd completely, but that changed in an update. For what it's worth, sysvinit would just happily continue booting the system with the disk unmounted.
Click to expand...
I suppose the biggest thing for me personally, though, is I do dislike systemd on principle.  I have become quite fond of *nix since the 90s, and most of that is due to Linux.  I appreciate that it has changed during this time, and I do see a lot of good from this, however the more it changes the less it is the thing that I loved, or at least some distros are.  I play with a bunch of OSs, so it isn't like I am stuck with systemd or Linux, but if I am trying to use more than a few distros I am stuck with what it has done to Linux.  I like options, and a lot of them are going away (although I hope systemd and the controversy over it will add more options in the long run, which it seems it will, even if it remains dominant in Linux).  It is also nice to be able to have the stuff that I do for fun help me with skills in my professional life.  Recently I felt like I didn't know anything while trying to work on something.  While not entirely true, it turned out that I do now lack skills to do some very simple common things that I didn't have trouble with in the past.  I really just underestimated how different things were going to be, and I DO need to learn it, regardless of my preferences, and that sucks.

Regarding the Pyra and my personal computers, I will probably be dual booting for a while.  I would really like to have my Pyra be one of the "fun" things that I play around with and still be able to get shit done when I need to.  For other computers I haven't decided, but I will probably be moving away from "mostly Linux", as it is now.  There are a lot of things I need to learn all around, and I will use this opportunity to work on a little of everything.  Lucky for me, I suppose, some of my classes deal with systemd, so it will be easier than doing it all alone (although figuring it out for myself is more fun, but I don't have time for that anymore).



Now I will go back to not being involved in this endless argument again.
 
What was annoying about it?  (How did it affect your usage of the system?)

-Neelix
Click to expand...

Another example about how shitty systemd is :

Fedora doesn't boot anymore on the devboard (it worked well some monthes ago). Only thing I get is that "Dependency failed for local file system".

I log into a rescue shell and look at the shitstemd logs.

HAHAHA, the logs are truncated with a serial port.

Not only that, but there's ZERO useful information about what failed.

So FUCK systemd.

And I'm not the only to HATE this piece of shit, busybox just dropped it :

http://git.busybox.net/busybox/commit/?id=accd9eeb719916da974584b33b1aeced5f3bb346
 
This is what I randomly commented in the fstab to make it boot :

#usbfs           /proc/bus/usb   usbfs   defaults              0  0

So basically, you have a bad entry in the fstab, the boot fails.

This is S T U P I D.
 
You might like http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2015/10/11/0/
 
I have always watched the whole situation from a distance and thought it would be rather nice, as long as you only use its very basic and original features... until I ran myself into a years old fatal systemd bug that Poettering refuses to fix, because it would break some of his broken concepts. Ever had your own dconf user runtime file being randomly disowned, making the settings daemon (and journald) running amok? A nasty thing that keeps occurring, it kills my system within seconds.
 
Silent-Hunter, if you don't have a reason to avoid systemd (we are well beyond the point of fighting widespread acceptance) just use it or one of the options out there that fulfills the dependency for those things you use that require it.  I am personally not fond of it for a few reasons but it is something many of us that interact with most distros are going to need to learn to use and accept, in some sense, even with all the problems it has brought us.

Linux-SWAT, thanks for that.  Hopefully I will be able to find that link when I get my Pyra.
 
Alright. I wasn't really planning on changing it anyway unless I need to edit boot stuff and have trouble. I am used to OpenRC, as that is what I use on Gentoo.
 
Linux-SWAT said:
This is what I randomly commented in the fstab to make it boot :

#usbfs /proc/bus/usb usbfs defaults 0 0

So basically, you have a bad entry in the fstab, the boot fails.

This is S T U P I D.
Click to expand...

No, not reading the manual and omitting the "nofail" option in fstab is stupid.

I'm not defending systemd, I'm just saying that as with any piece of software you should make sure you are using it correctly. There are plenty of better reasons to not like systemd. Such as why an init system itself needs networking.

Edit:
But now is not the time for me to be grumpy, Happy Holiday to you all!
 
Djhg2000 said:
No, not reading the manual and omitting the "nofail" option in fstab is stupid.
Click to expand...

At the very least I'd call that an odd design decision... Wouldn't it have made more more sense to make that the default, and add an option to mark particular volumes as being required to continue booting?

-Neelix
 
Not really.
Let's suppose a mount fails. What should happen next ?
Obviously, if / (or /bin, /usr, /home) doesn't mount, the answer is quite easy, most of the time.
However, let us suppose /thing/weird/dir doesn't mount, what should happen ? Maybe something in /etc requires something there, so the boot should fail, but how could systemd know this ?
 
Well, that's arguable. Maybe it should print a big warning, but still try booting anyway. Maybe it should abort, with a big warning. But either way, it seems that some systemd users have been mislead as to why they're being dropped into a recovery shell, so perhaps the big warning isn't big enough.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ClockworkCoder
Suckless - "Do one thing and do it well"
2 3
Replies
51
Views
15K
levi
levi
L
Nes Elite....?
Replies
15
Views
4K
lubidog
L
Kelvin
I'm worried about the Pyra's market performance.
2 3
Replies
51
Views
19K
second exodous
second exodous
ClockworkCoder
Preparing for the countdown...
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
11K
levi
levi
K
Anyone Still Selling Replacement Control Stick?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Shaun
Shaun
Back
Top