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 598980
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Well the problem is for software that depends on SysV init. Their software will just stop working suddently and they will have to invest a lot of time making work on Debian if they even bother. I understand the argument in favor of Systemd but saying there is no downside is just wrong.

Edited 2014-11-05 12:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

woegjiub Member since:

You are aware that sysv scripts can be run by systemd, right?

That being said, given that Slackware is the only major distro that still defaults to sysv, if a project isn't popular enough to get a unit file written for it, it's probably not popular enough to matter.

It's good that systemd can run sysv scripts, though: it means this isn't a problem, so if you can't get a unit file written (they're really dead easy compared to sysv scripts), you can still run your software on Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, CentOS, Arch, SUSE, Mandriva, etc..

Reply Parent Score: 4

spiderman Member since:

I'm aware you can run some SysV init scripts in systemd but the devil is in the details. Many scripts won't work. Those who depend on env variables like $HOME for instance will break. Moreover it will break a lot of other stuff that depend on /etc/init.d, runlevels and such things of SysV init. It may seem trivial but actually this kind of small details can bring hell. Each script will have to be tested against systemd. Some developers just won't bother and their software will suddently stop working.

Just for the record I'm not defending sysv, I'm just pointing out there are drawbacks. The benefit may be worth it, I don't have an opinion about that.

Edited 2014-11-05 16:45 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

CFWhitman Member since:

Actually, Slackware has never used SysV init. They've always used BSD init which, though also script based, is a different thing.

Reply Parent Score: 7