Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 02/02/19 at 03:41, Steve Litt wrote: > Of course, with cars, this complexity is partially > necessary because to raise MPG (Miles Per Gallon) you need a computer > to micromanage timing and amount of spark, air, fuel, and how they > interact. I know of no similar necessity with computers. You must never have dealt with *aaS, you must never have done fine-tuning and intelligent, dynamical resources allocation to Linux clusters or to heavily multithreading applications. What they're doing on cars is the application to mechanics of what has been done to computers for many years. Just look at how complex just RAM management has become in Linux: * fixed 4KiB pages have become Huge Pages (2MiB, up to 1GiB per page depending on architecture) * madvise and fadvise syscalls can advise the kernel about predicted (=future) memory allocation needs that alter the way the kernel allocates pages * shmem is an internal RAM resident filesystem used to manage shared memory * membarrier() system call allows issuing memory barriers across all running threads * heap placement is performed by a pseudo-random algorithm * VMA (Virtual Memory Address) base address allocation also is * you can choose between at least three SLAB (kernel objects memory allocation algorithm) allocators (depending on architecture): ALSB (regular allocator), SLOB (Simple Allocator) and SLUB (Unqueued Allocator) * automatic merging of slab caches to reduce kernel memory fragmentation * NUMA (Non-Uniform Memory Access) aware memory placement * Control Group support for mem allocation, HugeTLB allocation * support for Remote Direct Memory Access (DMA over TCP/IP) * support for zero-copy (buffer-to-buffer data shuffling) * copy-on-write (sharing of same-page between different processes) * support for Translation Lookaside Buffer (a cache of physical RAM addresses) * support of persistent or ephemeral Transcedent memory, ie "memory that is of unknown and dynamically variable size, addressable only indirectly by the kernel" (Wikipedia) This is just what I could recollect from my kernel-configuration sessions. How many of the entries in /proc/vmstat can you tell what they are and do? Then there are process-management features, CPU allocation strategies, bandwidth allocation algorithms and policies, a huge amount of networking parameters, queues and algorithms to fine tune cache, bandwith and buffer allocation, control exaustion, bottlenecks and latency, filesystem parameters and features too many to number, and of course all sets of security and corruption prevention and mitigation policies and algorithms. Computers have become enormously more complicated from the '60ies than cars and auto repair shop have. -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 08:49:34PM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 01/02/19 at 11:19, KatolaZ wrote: > > [about 100 lines cut off] > > > Jeez, that many? My wife was right that I got to bed too late > yesterday night! > > > > Are you willing to help with enabling s6/s6-rc in Devuan? > > > Oh my, that means I'll have to upgrade to Beowulf! And spend lots of > time tuning and reporting about it. > > When will I ever fix that leaking tap in the bathroom? 洛 > > > > There will > > be a talk by its author (Laurent bercot) and a dedicated hacking > > session at the Devuan Conference in Amsterdam. More info closer to the > > date. > > > Too bad I'll not be able to attend. I wished I was. Me neither. Medical constraints prevent me from travelling. I used to live in Amsterdam and have a dear friend there whom I haven't seen in over a decade. -- hendrik ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 14:56:45 +0300 Dmitrii Kashin wrote: > I'd like to notice that Benno just repeats systemd's propaganda. All > these theses were considered in 2014 by Jude Nelson. > > Here's the link: > http://judecnelson.blogspot.com/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fallacies.html > > And (if someone is interested) here's my russian translation: > https://www.opennet.ru/base/sys/systemd_myth.txt.html Yes! I forgot to mention Jude's fallacies when writing my response to Rice's presentation. Please read Jude's fallacies before reading my response. SteveT -- Steve Litt January 2019 featured book: Troubleshooting: Just the Facts http://www.troubleshooters.com/tjust ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 13:07:37 + Simon Hobson wrote: > It's clear that systemd isn't the right implementation. And it's > clear that Poettering isn't the right person to be doing it. But I'd > suggest that many of us "systemd - just say no" folks aren't > fundamentally opposed to improvements where the improvement is > actually better and not a bug ridden furball' Yes! As a matter of fact, a system to recognize and mount newly plugged thumb drives was developed right here on this list. SteveT -- Steve Litt January 2019 featured book: Troubleshooting: Just the Facts http://www.troubleshooters.com/tjust ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 16:38:28 -1000 Joel Roth via Dng wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:19:44AM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: > > Might interest someone: > > > > https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ > > > > [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet > > > > His attempt to cast that story for the > > pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look > > at a turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > > Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet > is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, > finding reasons to sell the systemd approach > to BSD conference attendees. > > To Benno Rice, the tragedy is the pathetic opposition > to what he construes as the inevitable forces of > progress and rationality. I watched the following video of Benno Rice's presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AeWu1fZ7bY This presentation is despicable. He's taken every the same tired flawed arguments from Poettering's writings, and filed off the patented Poettering nasty haughtiness so it sounds, well, rational. But it is still founded on Poettering's original fallacies. And if Rice is even 1/4 as smart as he appears to be, he knows darn well this stuff is false. +++ Note: Rice refers many times to "rc". That's what he calls the BSD init system, or at least the part spawned by PID1. +++ 17:57 The king of all this video's fallacies occurs at 17:57, where he "refutes" "objection" "It's bloated and monolithic." He trots out Poettering's old refutation that systemd is made from many binaries, and he says it all fits together to deliver a "system layer" for Linux. Most intelligent Linux users have rebutted such nonsense: Here's my rebuttal, in cartoon form: http://troubleshooters.com/linux/systemd/lol_systemd.htm Lot's of component binaries, but every single one of them requires an incredibly complex (and therefore error prone) interface, which in turn almost completely eliminates interchangeable parts, making repairability much more difficult and limiting opportunities to DIY. I recently heard a quote on NPR radio that 50 years ago you could start an auto repair shop with a lift and a couple hundred dollars of tools, but now it takes a million dollars of diagnostic equipment. This is the cost of complexity. Of course, with cars, this complexity is partially necessary because to raise MPG (Miles Per Gallon) you need a computer to micromanage timing and amount of spark, air, fuel, and how they interact. I know of no similar necessity with computers. Systemd forces more of your management and repair to be outsourced to a specialty house with the right tools and knowledge, instead of repairing it in-house with interchangeable parts and the test points those parts introduce. [LITT'S NOTE: I say this in spite of the snazzy layer of meters and test points which systemd bestows after epoxying off your real OS functionality] Not good for the computer's owner, very good for those specialty houses, of which Redhat leads the pack. The fact that systemd is a grossly entangled monolith of custom-made pieces incompatible with pieces not made by the systemd folks is reason enough to stay way away from systemd. 8:33 "What the traditional rc system really doesn't do is automated service management. You can bring in other tools to do that like runit or supervisord or other things, but that is bringing in third party stuff that thinks a bit differently to the way that everything else does, and so you kinda need to [stutter] it's this other notion of bringing in other things that you suddenly have to think of the way it thinks, the way your servicing manager thinks, and various other things, which again --- we kinda get used to, like if you pick runit and install it you kinda get used to the way runit thinks, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the impedence mismatch between what runit does and what rc does is good." Wow, where to start? He first names runit (and supervisord) as doing the "automated service management" as well as systemd does. But then, to make monstrosity systemd look better than solid and simple runit (and s6 and daemontools, which he forgot), he invents an "impedance mismatch" between runit and rc to downgrade runit. I have a BSEE degree, I know what impedance mismatch is, and I can tell you the only way you get an "impedance mismatch" within software is if you're using a circuit emulation program. Reminds me of guys who go around trying to impress women by injecting, in worldly fashion, words like "entropy" and "energy" in discussions of day to day life. Rice really should have left the pseudo-science at home, with his flat earth and "smoking is not hazardous" stuff. There's no impedance mismatch, and configuration of runit is quite easy. Yeah, configuring runit (he forgot s6, by the way), is a little different than
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
[Time references are from the video on https://judecnelson.blogspot.com/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fallacies.html ] On 31/01/19 at 12:56, Dmitrii Kashin wrote: > В Чт, 31/01/2019 в 00:19 +0100, Alessandro Selli пишет: [...] > I'd like to notice that Benno just repeats systemd's propaganda. Actually he lists things that Linux+systemd have that BSD does not. And he prompts the BSD community towards implementing what it lacks, *without* *ever* *suggesting* porting systemd to BSD. > All > these theses were considered in 2014 by Jude Nelson. > > Here's the link: > http://judecnelson.blogspot.com/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fallacies.html Good read. But it does not refute anything that Benno Rice said. Fallacy #1.1: "Systemd's components have well-defined interfaces, so you can just replace the parts you don't like." Rice never claimed systemd is cool because you can replace any of it's components. Fallacy #1.2: "The Linux kernel is monolithic, therefore it is okay for systemd to be monolithic" Did Rice ever said anything about systemd being good or bad because of it's monolithic nature. *Fallacy #2: "Lots of people use systemd, therefore you should too"* Rice did not state that. What he did say is that there are reasons systemd caught on like wildfire, it is an innovation right were Linux was more strikingly lagging behing WindowsNT and macOSX (launchd): "active service management" (07:55). He did state the obvious, that all major Linux distributions do run systemd, but he does not suggest this is a reason the BSD people should even try porting it to that OS. Fallacy #2.1: "Systemd earned widespread adoption through its technical merits" He did say systemd has technical merits, and he talked about them. I already listed them, they are again: automatic HW and SW system reconfiguration, cgroups, message transport, service lifecycle, automation API and containers. If an alternative init and service management system is to have any chance at being considered a viable alternative to systemd it's got to be as good as systemd at doing these things. Benno Rice would like the BSD community to star developing their own solution. What about the Linux folks? What do we have, what are developers working on that could do that? Fallacy #3: "People who don't like systemd just don't like change" Well yes, Benno Rice did say that most resistance to systemd stems from the unwillingness to change long time habits. Which is true, I do remember how much I hated migrating from initd to xinetd, learning the new rules iptables introduced compared to ipchains, losing LiLO's and then grub-0.8's simplicity to be forced into grub2's awfully complicated config file syntax and generation procedure. But he said it mostly of the BSD people, and as an example to that he said (28:07): "And one of the biggest problems that I had with the FreeBSD community on this one was things like this: [slide] #systemd got you down? Come see my talk "Switching to the BSDs" at @lfnw this weekend. linuxfestnorthwest.org/conferences/lf... because to me this says on behalf of my community: 'Come join FreeBSD, we'll never change, we refuse to move forward into the future.'" Can you really think sticking to sysv-init to avoid systemd tells anything different? Fallacy #4: "Unit files are better than shell scripts" While he did not state that, it's a matter of fact that SysV's init script have been for decades vilified as an awkward kludge, generally badly implemented, extremely static and inefficient way of managing system services and deamons. And rightly so. All attempts at producing a better init than SysV started with doing away with service scripts and having just config files instead. Fallacy #4.1: "Unit files reduce complexity" While I do acknowledge this is true, I also list this as a problem. Reducing complexity has greatly reduced sysadmin's capability to customize their systems or implementing a workaround when systemd gets something wrong. Benno Rice did say this, and he is right. *Fallacy #4.2: "Shell scripts are buggy"* Yes, they are. A lot. And they often are so easily correctable that I wonder how comes some bugs have staid in init script for years after patches were proposed (a year ago I figured out an init script just needed two lines of code to implement the status reporting it lacked). Scripts are considered something trivial and inessential, they only run once for a very brief time and all it matters is that the service they are to start gets started. I can't explain it in any other way. *Fallacy #4.3: "Systemd is better because it gets rid of shell scripts!"* Again, Benno Rice did not state this, but this is true. Again i point out that *all* sysv-init alternatives started with doing away with init scripts. *Fallacy #4.4: "Systemd is better because it reduces shell script code
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 01/02/19 at 11:19, KatolaZ wrote: > [about 100 lines cut off] Jeez, that many? My wife was right that I got to bed too late yesterday night! > Are you willing to help with enabling s6/s6-rc in Devuan? Oh my, that means I'll have to upgrade to Beowulf! And spend lots of time tuning and reporting about it. When will I ever fix that leaking tap in the bathroom? 洛 > There will > be a talk by its author (Laurent bercot) and a dedicated hacking > session at the Devuan Conference in Amsterdam. More info closer to the > date. Too bad I'll not be able to attend. I wished I was. > Talking about software has never produced software ;) There are *good* reasons I never was a developer, lol! I'm just a sysadmin, I loove telling devs how lousy *their* software is and then wait for their next release to again open several bug reports against it! -- Alessandro Selli VOIP SIP: dhatarat...@ekiga.net Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key: BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
В Чт, 31/01/2019 в 00:19 +0100, Alessandro Selli пишет: > Might interest someone: > > https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ Thx. As this article must be interesting to people subscribed to this list, I attach a free link: https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/777595/8f021897f452e5b4/ I'd like to notice that Benno just repeats systemd's propaganda. All these theses were considered in 2014 by Jude Nelson. Here's the link: http://judecnelson.blogspot.com/2014/09/systemd-biggest-fallacies.html And (if someone is interested) here's my russian translation: https://www.opennet.ru/base/sys/systemd_myth.txt.html ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 12:33:32AM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 31/01/19 at 03:38, Joel Roth via Dng wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:19:44AM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> Might interest someone: > >> > >> https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ > >> > >> [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet > >> > >> His attempt to cast that story for the > >> pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a > >> turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > > Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet > > is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, > > finding reasons to sell the systemd approach > > to BSD conference attendees. > > Not really. He points out there were good reasons to want a new init, > that systemd was a try at innovating something that was old, and that > this is a different matter compared to *how* that change was implemented. > > Honestly, the anti-systemd front is never going to prevail pushing > technology dating from the 70's or steering the debate into an ad > hominem assault against Lennart Poettering. It's only chance is [about 100 lines cut off] Are you willing to help with enabling s6/s6-rc in Devuan? There will be a talk by its author (Laurent bercot) and a dedicated hacking session at the Devuan Conference in Amsterdam. More info closer to the date. Talking about software has never produced software ;) HND KatolaZ -- [ ~.,_ Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - Devuan -- Freaknet Medialab ] [ "+. katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it ] [ @) http://kalos.mine.nu --- Devuan GNU + Linux User ] [ @@) http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia -- GPG: 0B5F062F ] [ (@@@) Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ ] signature.asc Description: PGP signature ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
Alessandro Selli wrote: > On 31/01/19 at 03:38, Joel Roth via Dng wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:19:44AM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: > >> Might interest someone: > >> > >> https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ > >> > >> [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet > >> > >> His attempt to cast that story for the > >> pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a > >> turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > > Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet > > is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, > > finding reasons to sell the systemd approach > > to BSD conference attendees. > > Not really. He points out there were good reasons to want a new init, > that systemd was a try at innovating something that was old, and that > this is a different matter compared to *how* that change was implemented. Hi Alessandro, Rice scrupulously avoids mentioning other innovations in the field of init systems. He represents it as a binary decision of old versus new. > Honestly, the anti-systemd front is never going to > prevail pushing technology dating from the 70's or > steering the debate into an ad hominem assault against > Lennart Poettering. It's only chance is developing > something better, an init system and daemon > management-and-monitoring tool that was simpler, more > versatile, customizable and stable than systemd. Anti-systemd seems like a pejorative way to describe a community, and front seems like a rather warlike metaphor. I'd like to find another paradigm! Also, if it is a war, Red Hat and friends always won based on the number of users' machines running systemd. All those administrators will certainly prefer to stay with what they have. Funny that you bring up ad-hominum, as I didn't mention even mention LP. Also interesting that neither you nor Rice mention that security considerations may be involved in using systemd. > That is, the only chance against > systemd is to come up with something technically better. May I ask you > to please present technical arguments either against systemd or in favor > of alternatives rather than railing against LP or Benno Rice? The reason I hit on security is systemd is based on dBus, and RPC frameworks have significant security weaknesses compared to other solutions not relying on RPC. NFS is well known for being vulnerable due to its dependence on RPC. Windows has an enormous history of RPC related vulnerabilities. I don't get how the tradeoff of this design choice is just waved away. There are so many other arguments against systemd that have been discussed so endlessly leading to this distribution and community that I don't think further discussion on this list is relevant... I agree with you that technical arguments will not get business owners to change their init systems. That is why I say that the war is mostly won by systemd. Not matter what the issues, no one can be fired for choosing systemd/Red Hat/IBM. Those who know and care, of course, can go elsewhere, thanks in large part to the hardworking Devuan developers++ cheers, -- Joel Roth ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
Alessandro Selli wrote: >> Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet >> is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, >> finding reasons to sell the systemd approach >> to BSD conference attendees. > > Not really. He points out there were good reasons to want a new init, > that systemd was a try at innovating something that was old, and that > this is a different matter compared to *how* that change was implemented. Beat me to it. I listened and he did make many good points which you've pointed out much more elegantly than I would have managed. While picking out bits by time, I liked his dig at the state of Debian management at around 16 minutes in when he mentions "that vote" :-) > "systemd makes heavy use of dbus. I'm not a big fan of dbus but i am a > big fan of messages. [...] One of the things that I told the BSD people > was basically we should write our own message transport. My version, if > I were to write one, would be kernel resident rather than user space and > would allow a lot more of security and authentication and access control > elements on the actual bus endpoints". Exactly. Whatever the merits (or otherwise) of dbus as an implementation of a messaging system, the function it's trying to implement is a good idea. Ditto udev. And to be honest, a significant chunk of systemd as well - the ideas are good, the implementation and the way it's been managed, "no so good". ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 31/01/19 at 03:38, Joel Roth via Dng wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:19:44AM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: >> Might interest someone: >> >> https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ >> >> [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet >> >> His attempt to cast that story for the >> pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a >> turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet > is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, > finding reasons to sell the systemd approach > to BSD conference attendees. Not really. He points out there were good reasons to want a new init, that systemd was a try at innovating something that was old, and that this is a different matter compared to *how* that change was implemented. Honestly, the anti-systemd front is never going to prevail pushing technology dating from the 70's or steering the debate into an ad hominem assault against Lennart Poettering. It's only chance is developing something better, an init system and daemon management-and-monitoring tool that was simpler, more versatile, customizable and stable than systemd. That is, the only chance against systemd is to come up with something technically better. May I ask you to please present technical arguments either against systemd or in favor of alternatives rather than railing against LP or Benno Rice? Because reading what you wrote, I believe I heard a different talk than you have. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo Nowhere does he state that BSD should adopt systemd, but he does point out that BSD is lagging behind Linux on many key fronts: automatic HW and SW system reconfiguration, cgroups, message transport, service lifecycle, automation API and containers, for instance. But nowhere does he peddle systemd to the BSD folks. He instead stated that: (30:26) "systemd makes heavy use of dbus. I'm not a big fan of dbus but i am a big fan of messages. [...] One of the things that I told the BSD people was basically we should write our own message transport. My version, if I were to write one, would be kernel resident rather than user space and would allow a lot more of security and authentication and access control elements on the actual bus endpoints". (33:13) "The barrier to entry for building something on top of it like an appliance is massively reduced. But again systemd doesn't have to be the only implementation of this. You should go and explore". This is technical reasoning, this is pointing out what need to be done to turn the tide on something different, on something better than systemd. He rightly states that better does not necessarily mean "the way it was done before", change is part of life and resisting it just out of aversion to change eventually proves futile. There are points over which I disagree with him, when he states that binary logs are a good idea for instance, but he is damn right that bickering against Poetering's personality or that systemd goes against the principles of Unix as they were laid out 40-50 years ago is a losing proposition. We're talking of software, technology and system services, systemd is leading right now and sysv-init is worthless as a weapon against it. Linux is in need of something better, at least in terms of simplicity and robustness, than systemd. But I still can't see anything capable of taking the lead and gaining back a significant share of the installed base from systemd. Which worries me, because this means that systemd is going to become ever more entrenched in the Linux ecosystem, to the point it might begin to dictate the future evolution of the OS, from the kernel to userland. And still what I hear the most is that systemd stinks because LP is an assh*le or that it violates the Unix philosophy. When I hear people speak of philosophy on technology matters I think they don't have a clue yet they're struggling to prevail on a purely dialectical plane. I've been waiting years for something better than systemd, modern and simpler, more modular, customizable and easier to understand and predict. Years when systemd just got bigger, more tentacular and more widely adopted. And all I got was the same old, static, sclerotic sysv-init. Enough with calling people names when they don't share your attitudes against Lennart Poettering or when they don't blame systemd for the death of the neighbor's cat. What can be used today to replace systemd that was not devised 40 years ago when networks were as static as motorways and external removable devices required a technician to change them? What can be used that will run virtualized, containerized systems just as well, that is easier, more customizable and more reliable? In my current job I manage the less than 10% of the infrastructure that runs on non-Windows systems. They are all systemd systems except two old Sun Solaris boxes. I know that pushing management away from systemd
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 1/31/19 7:50 AM, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Simon Hobson - 31.01.19, 14:07: >> Massimo Coppola wrote: > […] >> It's clear that systemd isn't the right implementation. And it's clear >> that Poettering isn't the right person to be doing it. But I'd >> suggest that many of us "systemd - just say no" folks aren't >> fundamentally opposed to improvements where the improvement is >> actually better and not a bug ridden furball' > > Agreed. > > For me right now runit is closest to what I think would be good to have. > > Thanks, > And containers are not a new idea, see, e.g., LXC and its kin. So there are in fact people working on alternate solutions in the same space as systemd, not with the same monolithic approach. And these alternate implementations are trying to be best of breed in their own space, while playing well with others. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 2019-01-31 1:22 a.m., Rick Moen wrote: As I'm (like you) an LWN.net subscriber, I can furnish a 'subscriber link' for the benefit of Dng readers. Enjoy. https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/777595/c64f9542bdd40595/ Thanks Rick, I appreciate this. Reading it was like reading the incomplete logic of Star Trek's Borg. Not lying, but far from the whole truth. After seeing the assimilation of many Linux users from my lowly perspective of Earth it is quite horrifying to see the possible acceptance and potential further spread of the disease. Clarke ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 1/31/19 12:22 AM, Rick Moen wrote: As I'm (like you) an LWN.net subscriber, I can furnish a 'subscriber link' for the benefit of Dng readers. Enjoy. https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/777595/c64f9542bdd40595/ Thanks, Rick. Interesting read. Regarding systemd..If it were as grand as the supporters say, it would not need all the strategic deception to stay relevant. Kinda reminds me of a certain political figure ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
Simon Hobson - 31.01.19, 14:07: > Massimo Coppola wrote: […] > It's clear that systemd isn't the right implementation. And it's clear > that Poettering isn't the right person to be doing it. But I'd > suggest that many of us "systemd - just say no" folks aren't > fundamentally opposed to improvements where the improvement is > actually better and not a bug ridden furball' Agreed. For me right now runit is closest to what I think would be good to have. Thanks, -- Martin ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
Massimo Coppola wrote: > But I guess there's no need either to list all technical systemd issues here, > or accept the unsound logic that unkind developers are the only reason of > systemd criticism. With all the hot air, I suspect that many people have lost sight of the distinction between an implementation of an idea (udev, dbus,systemd) and the idea itself (a better way of managing a system). It's clear that systemd isn't the right implementation. And it's clear that Poettering isn't the right person to be doing it. But I'd suggest that many of us "systemd - just say no" folks aren't fundamentally opposed to improvements where the improvement is actually better and not a bug ridden furball' ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 2019年1月31日 15:22:57 JST, Rick Moen wrote: >Quoting Alessandro Selli (alessandrose...@linux.com): > >> Might interest someone: >> >> https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ >> >> [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet >> >> Tragedy, according to Wikipedia, is "a form of drama based on human >> suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in >> audiences". Benno Rice took his inspiration from that definition for >his >> 2019 linux.conf.au talk on the story of systemd which, he said, >involves >> no shortage of suffering. His attempt to cast that story for the >> pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look >at a >> turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > >As I'm (like you) an LWN.net subscriber, I can furnish a 'subscriber >link' for the benefit of Dng readers. Enjoy. >https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/777595/c64f9542bdd40595/ > >-- >Cheers, "I am a member of a civilization (IAAMOAC). Step >back >Rick Moenfrom anger. Study how awful our ancestors had it, >yet >r...@linuxmafia.com they struggled to get you here. Repay them by >appreciating >McQ! (4x80) the civilization you inherited." -- >David Brin >___ >Dng mailing list >Dng@lists.dyne.org >https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng Thanks a lot Rick! ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
Hi all, I don't contribute often to the list, but I really found irritating that after setting a cuckoo egg in the nest someone comes and start telling everyone how much nice is the deviant bird. I think Lars Noodén already pointed out, the news is that the target of systemd propaganda is the BSD world now. I've listened to the youtube video while working, IMHO the speaker is downplaying all the issues with bugs, insecure code and and feature bloat, trying to cast systemd opposition as purely resistance to change. But change is always good, isn't it? Poor systemd developers, they are just not gifted in talking to open source developers... But I guess there's no need either to list all technical systemd issues here, or accept the unsound logic that unkind developers are the only reason of systemd criticism. Unfortunately, there was not QA session after the talk, or I didn't find it on youtube. I was curious about that. I didn't know the guy before, but when he says that Poettering somehow always gets thing done, taht he "delivers", this really is company-style talking to me: if you have something to sell, everything is fine. If you are able to push your ideas into someone else's machine, you are a genius. Besides, one could say that "Lennart delivers" thanks to (massive corporate backing and) a swarm of other guys running around and smooth talking everyone into accepting the "new gospel". Some of the problems systemd tried to tackle are real, so what? - strawman fallacy, the criticism is toward systemd, not toward all the problems it supposedly tackles - periodically breaking things, blaming downstream and closing with WONTIFX is well outside any sensible definition of "not being gifted in talking to a software community" - still, the rightfulness of a question isn't magic, it doesn't turn a technically wrong answer into a correct one. I can't really grok the fact that the speaker seems to work on BSD security... Regards Massimo ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
Il giorno mercoledì 30/01/2019 18:57:05 -0600 goli...@dyne.org ha scritto: > On 2019-01-30 17:19, Alessandro Selli wrote: > > Might interest someone: > > > > https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ > > > > [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet > > > > Tragedy, according to Wikipedia, is "a form of drama based on human > > suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in > > audiences". Benno Rice took his inspiration from that definition for > > his > > 2019 linux.conf.au talk on the story of systemd which, he said, > > involves > > no shortage of suffering. His attempt to cast that story for the > > pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at > > a > > turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > > > > ___ > > > > Unfortunately . . . > > "The page you have tried to view (Systemd as tragedy) is currently > available to LWN subscribers only." > > Too bad. Might have been entertaining . . . > > golinux > Some tragedy happens also in the audio world: https://lists.linuxaudio.org/archives/linux-audio-user/2019-January/111568.html Regards -- al3xu5 / dotcommon Say NO to copyright, patents, trademarks and any industrial design restrictions. __ ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 1/31/19 4:38 AM, Joel Roth via Dng wrote: > On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:19:44AM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: >> Might interest someone: >> >> https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ >> >> [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet >> >> His attempt to cast that story for the >> pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a >> turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > > Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet > is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, > finding reasons to sell the systemd approach > to BSD conference attendees. > > To Benno Rice, the tragedy is the pathetic opposition > to what he construes as the inevitable forces of > progress and rationality. That is also my interpretation of his statements, both at LCA and BSDCan. I'd seen the video of his LCA talk already and the gist was that he thinks systemd is great and that everyone should work on implementing something identical within FreeBSD. Something weird and disturbing that it got through the selection process and made it in as a talk. About the only attempt he made at an argument in favor of systemd was his constant use of the logical fallacy appeal to novelty. i.e. "it is better because it is newer" but at least he reduced the amount of personal attacks against non-systemd people this time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_AIw9bGogo He said about the same thing at BSDcan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AeWu1fZ7bY I still hold out hope that the normal tracks for LCA 2019 will be better but have not seen them yet except for the Lewis [1] talk which can be recommended for watching. /Lars [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p76hGxv3-HE ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
Quoting Alessandro Selli (alessandrose...@linux.com): > Might interest someone: > > https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ > > [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet > > Tragedy, according to Wikipedia, is "a form of drama based on human > suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in > audiences". Benno Rice took his inspiration from that definition for his > 2019 linux.conf.au talk on the story of systemd which, he said, involves > no shortage of suffering. His attempt to cast that story for the > pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a > turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. As I'm (like you) an LWN.net subscriber, I can furnish a 'subscriber link' for the benefit of Dng readers. Enjoy. https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/777595/c64f9542bdd40595/ -- Cheers, "I am a member of a civilization (IAAMOAC). Step back Rick Moenfrom anger. Study how awful our ancestors had it, yet r...@linuxmafia.com they struggled to get you here. Repay them by appreciating McQ! (4x80) the civilization you inherited." -- David Brin ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:19:44AM +0100, Alessandro Selli wrote: > Might interest someone: > > https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ > > [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet > > His attempt to cast that story for the > pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a > turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. Hard to believe I listened to the same talk Corbet is describing. What I heard was a propaganda piece, finding reasons to sell the systemd approach to BSD conference attendees. To Benno Rice, the tragedy is the pathetic opposition to what he construes as the inevitable forces of progress and rationality. -- Joel Roth ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 1/30/19 4:57 PM, goli...@dyne.org wrote: On 2019-01-30 17:19, Alessandro Selli wrote: Might interest someone: https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet Tragedy, according to Wikipedia, is "a form of drama based on human suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in audiences". Benno Rice took his inspiration from that definition for his 2019 linux.conf.au talk on the story of systemd which, he said, involves no shortage of suffering. His attempt to cast that story for the pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. ___ Unfortunately . . . "The page you have tried to view (Systemd as tragedy) is currently available to LWN subscribers only." Too bad. Might have been entertaining . . . golinux ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng In a week, that article will become available ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 18:57:05 -0600, goli...@dyne.org wrote in message <810d7588b1d19b97a367da1d027b7...@dyne.org>: > On 2019-01-30 17:19, Alessandro Selli wrote: > > Might interest someone: > > > > https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ > > > > [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet > > > > Tragedy, according to Wikipedia, is "a form of drama based on human > > suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in > > audiences". Benno Rice took his inspiration from that definition > > for his > > 2019 linux.conf.au talk on the story of systemd which, he said, > > involves > > no shortage of suffering. His attempt to cast that story for the > > pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look > > at a > > turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. > > > > ___ > > > > Unfortunately . . . > > "The page you have tried to view (Systemd as tragedy) is currently > available to LWN subscribers only." > > Too bad. Might have been entertaining . . . ..it is: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Systemd+as+tragedy=web https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Systemd+as+tragedy=videos ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Systemd as tragedy
On 2019-01-30 17:19, Alessandro Selli wrote: Might interest someone: https://lwn.net/Articles/777595/ [Front] Posted Jan 28, 2019 20:05 UTC (Mon) by corbet Tragedy, according to Wikipedia, is "a form of drama based on human suffering that invokes an accompanying catharsis or pleasure in audiences". Benno Rice took his inspiration from that definition for his 2019 linux.conf.au talk on the story of systemd which, he said, involves no shortage of suffering. His attempt to cast that story for the pleasure of his audience resulted in a sympathetic and nuanced look at a turbulent chapter in the history of the Linux system. ___ Unfortunately . . . "The page you have tried to view (Systemd as tragedy) is currently available to LWN subscribers only." Too bad. Might have been entertaining . . . golinux ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
