Pyra debian with systemd?

[Orbstheorem]

I was wondering whether the official Debian distro will come with systemd or sysvinit as Pandora did?

Quite a few of my Configuration files assume systemd, so It'll be a pain in the neck to find and rewrite such configs...

Thanks!

 

[TrashyMG]

Standard Debian Jessie, so Systemd.

 

[Orbstheorem]

Yay!

EDIT: Best error ever:

 

[TrashyMG]

You're one of the first people I seen that is actually happy that it has systemd, unlike the rest are linux purist hipsters around here.

 

[Orbstheorem]

I might have very little experience, but from the feature perspective, systemd service files seem more flexible than a sh script. Besides, one can always call a sh script from a systemd service. (The other way around seems not so trivial to me).

 

[Silent-Hunter]

You're one of the first people I seen that is actually happy that it has systemd, unlike the rest are linux purist hipsters around here.

I prefer sysvinit simply because it is what I'm used to.

 

[FIQ]

While I don't nearly dislike systemd as much as some other people I've seen, it really hasn't improved my user experience on desktop (Arch). Quite the opposite actually, while my issues are few and far inbetween, since the systemd switch I've had 3 issues that was ultimately traced to be systemd's fault (Binary logs, the computer being brought down to its knees because I segfaulted a lot of times in short succession, and its bootloader not being able to accept any key input from my keyboard whatsoever).

 

[diligentcircle]

I don't think liking systemd better than sysvinit is uncommon. It's just that it's so obvious that systemd is better to most people that they just don't talk about it.

 

[levi]

I'm more used to systemd these days. I wouldn't say I prefer it as such - if there's one thing config files cannot be over shell scripts is more flexible, but they can be and are slightly easier to grok from a standing start. I also appreciate that systemd has a series of relatively rational interfaces that I can get manpages for, rather than what felt slightly like magic incantations on a sysvinit system.

Edit: @FIQ Systemd doesn't ship with a bootloader as far as I know. Arch offers a number of different options for a bootloader, starting from good old GRUB and working up from there.

 

[tigerroast]

Edit: @FIQ Systemd doesn't ship with a bootloader as far as I know. Arch offers a number of different options for a bootloader, starting from good old GRUB and working up from there.

Gummiboot was merged into systemd as systemd-boot, which shouldn't be an issue for people on UEFI-based systems (especially on Arch, which takes care of most behind-the-scenes concerns with default installs).

Either way, I've had none of the issues FIQ mentioned. I've only had the issue with the AMD error messages popping up on boot, but it doesn't seem to cause any problems, nor is it related to systemd.

 

[Orbstheorem]

I'm also using Arch and personally I like the way user services, timers and sockets interact. I'm sure I can implement similar features on sysvinit, but having system support is great.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Removing shitstemd is actually easy on Debian.

 

[Plume]

Removing shitstemd is actually easy on Debian.

An additional proof that systemd is well designed

 

[rygD]

Removing shitstemd is actually easy on Debian.

Watch out, some people might think you are a hipster or something for having an opinion that differs from most Linux users, because as we all know Linux is about uniformity, blind obedience, and doing/using exactly the same as everyone else.

 

[Djoga'Ro]

How is the one avoiding systemd the hipster? Those jumping on the systemd-bandwagon are the hipsters.

 

[_jr_]

Removing shitstemd is actually easy on Debian.

Last I checked (a couple of months ago) Jessie's Network manager had a hard dependency on systemd. Has this been fixed (and is there an online resource that lists reverse dependencies?)?

edit: seems like the dependency is still in place

 

[Shlee]

Systemd is the bomb.

 

[bzar]

How is the one avoiding systemd the hipster? Those jumping on the systemd-bandwagon are the hipsters.

I guess when people identify as opposed to something a majority readily adopts they tend to define a group of their own. Some people are drawn to these smaller underdog groups just because they're not the "sheep". Typically these sorts of people find all kinds of rationales for their choice, mostly the kind that nicely translate into making the "other side" look bad and will fight tooth and nail to keep "their side" "winning" no matter if the actual reasons for the split are resolved. It's these kinds of people I'd refer to as the "hipster" type, being different for the sake of being different. Of course, no hipster will confess this, but will hold tight to the (typically) moral high ground arguments, dismissing all others as minor details compared to them.

Some people, like @Silent-Hunter, have their own, valid reasons for choosing the "side" they're on. They're not "hipsters" even though they use a non-mainstream thing, because they don't do it just to be different. Some do.

Using systemd can hardly be called hipster anymore, since it's become so mainstream it has shipped with multiple distributions for some time. Maybe it was at one point, but not anymore.

 

[FIQ]

Yeah, I use systemd-boot. The bootloader issue was found recently since it was the first time I had to intervene (I needed to switch runlevel and preferred to do so on boot to avoid oddities). Now that I've discovered it, I intend to switch to something else (probably GRUB) in the forseeable future.

As for the segfault issue, I was debugging a C application, and if I segfaulted something 10 times within about 5 minutes, the system became unusable for some time (IIRC it was because journald was doing weird things).

 

[Shlee]

Complaining about Systemd is the new complaining about udev which was the new complaining about PulseAudio which was the new complaining about selinux which was the new complaining about.........................