Linked by jessesmith on Wed 5th Nov 2014 10:39 UTC
Linux Over the past year I've been reading a lot of opinions on the new init technology, systemd. Some people think systemd is wonderful, the bee's knees. Others claim that systemd is broken by design. Some see systemd as a unifying force, a way to unite the majority of the Linux distributions. Others see systemd as a growing blob that is slowly becoming an overly large portion of the operating system. One thing that has surprised me a little is just how much people care about systemd, whether their opinion of the technology is good or bad. People in favour faithfully (and sometimes falsely) make wonderful claims about what systemd is and what it can supposedly do. Opponents claim systemd will divide the Linux community and drive many technical users to other operating systems. There is a lot of hype and surprisingly few people presenting facts.
Thread beginning with comment 598978
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Comment by spiderman
by spiderman on Wed 5th Nov 2014 12:46 UTC
Member since:

It's not vi vs emacs or KDE vs GNOME. You can't have both easily. Vi and emacs have very few dependencies. You can just have both installed and they both work. Systemd and SysV have deep impacts on the whole Operating System. You can not have both installed and expect both to work. It has more impact than the kernel itself. I don't think it's reasonable to ask Debian to maintain both. They would have to actually maintain 2 separate OS. It would be less effort to just split the distro in 2 distros and have a team for Debian-SysV. It would be lika asking Debian to use both rpm and deb packages. While probably possible with a lot of hacking it's better to have 2 distros for that.

So I think it's a binary choice: SysV XOR Systemd. I understand both sides and it's not easy. Systemd is probably better than SysV but all software has to be migrated and maintained, which may end up with forks and waste of developer time or some projects just giving up support either for linux or for other Unixes.
It's really a hard question.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Comment by spiderman
by jessesmith on Wed 5th Nov 2014 13:36 in reply to "Comment by spiderman"
jessesmith Member since:

Actually, you can have both systemd and SysV installed at the same time and have them both work. Obviously they don't _run_ at the same time, but you can set them up so you can switch back and forth. Since systemd is mostly compatible with SysV scripts, it is possible to maintain SysV init and just switch to running sysetmd when you want to. Chances are the only people who want to do that are testers and systemd developers, but let's not pretend there is somethign special about init that prevents you from installnig multiple implmentations.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by spiderman
by spiderman on Wed 5th Nov 2014 16:40 in reply to "RE: Comment by spiderman"
spiderman Member since:

Each package has to know if it has to start with systemd, sysv init or both and install the scripts at the right place with symlinks and has to be tested 4 times. That's some work but thinking about it you are right it's not as hard as I first thought. Still a lot more work than packaging vi and emacs and making sure they work.

Reply Parent Score: 3