you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 78 points 1 week ago* (9 children)

There are many legitimate complaints. Bundling a bunch of services into a single binary goes completely against Unix philosophy. Systemd changing from text to binary logs is my pet peeve.

Copying how Windows does things isn't necessarily the best.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] [S] 17 points 6 days ago

    I was annoyed with binary logs until I found cases where compressing logs was literally 10x or more improvement, like if you ran into a bug that just repeatedly spit the same log.

    And I know logrotate compresses text logs too but if you're going to compress logs into tar.gz, might as well just make it binary by default and have a nice interface (journald) on top

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 39 points 1 week ago

    You know it's not a single binary, right ? Systemd is a bunch of different, mostly single usage, mostly optional, binaries. As far as Unix philosophy goes, Systemd is definitely following the principles, which is not the case for the Kernel for instance.

    As for the binary logs, I used to hate it, but then, not having to manually parse logs for filtering is really nice.

    I do have my issues with Systemd, but it not following the Unix philosophy is not one of them.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 27 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    Richard P. Gabriel, in his essay β€œThe Rise of Worse-is-Better,” expounds on this theme (see Appendix A). His thesis is that the Unix design philosophy requires that all design decisions err on the side of implementation simplicity, and not on the side of correctness, consistency, or completeness. He calls this the β€œWorse Is Better” philosophy and shows how it yields programs that are technically inferior to programs designed where correctness and consistency are paramount, but that are evolutionarily superior because they port more easily. Just like a virus.

    The highest achievement of the Unix-aesthetic is to have a command that does precisely one function, and does it well (...) This philosophy, in the hands of amateurs, leads to inexplicably mind-numbing botches like the existence of two programs, β€œhead” and β€œtail,” which print the first part or the last part of a file, depending. Even though their operations are duals of one another, β€œhead” and β€œtail” are different programs, written by different authors, and take different options!

    From The Unix Hater's Handbook

    (I like Linux, but it's not all sunshine and rainbows)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 13 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    That head/tail thing is kind of a goofy argument. For one thing they aren't duals; tail is naturally more complex because the end of a file often changes and the application can optionally keep showing you the new output. Also, the fact that they're separate applications in the first place is arguably better than the a one-application approach, which would always require a command line switch to select between outputting the start or end of a file. And finally, while I guess this could vary between implementations of head and tail, mine has identical switches for all the common options.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 6 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    They could have been two commands that call a single parent command with different options. For example, imagine if cat had an option -N to restrict the number of lines that was printed, and also an option -t to start from the end. head would just proxy to cat -N and tail would proxy to cat -N -t. Combining the three into a single implementation reduces total LoC and opportunity for bugs. Also reduces total maintenance burden.

    I believe busybox is like this actually - a ton of Unix commands in a single package. It's used by Alpine Linux, a tiny and performance linux distro commonly used by docker containers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 6 days ago (1 child)

    Busybox is literally just a bundle. That's its whole purpose. It doesn't reimplement anything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 6 days ago*

    Some quick research says that it is indeed a re-implementation. The first line of the wikipedia, says:

    BusyBox is an implementation of many Unix commands in a single executable file.

    You can download the source code yourself to verify. And if you've actually used Alpine Linux before you would have also noticed that the commands provided by busybox have only a subset of the options provided by their GNU coreutils counterparts.

    Please do your research before so confidently correcting other people.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

    I initially agreed with your take there but I actually think they're a great argument for their point. head and tail are the exact same abstraction. Their implementations will be quite different, but they both serve "provided this data, give me these lines". Consider instead that these are simply operations on arrays and actually they map perfectly to Python slices: data[:10] and data[-10:]. This abstraction mapping also shows that, imo, the tool should provide data[n:m] and it would still be entirely consistent with the Unix philosophy. In fact, this tool exists in the Unix toolkit: sed -n n,mp. Three tools then are currently required for the simple concept of "slice lines". I also think it's a bit of a mess. You could replace head with sed fairly easily: sed -n '1,10p' but not tail (it is possible, but quite slow and very opaque)

    As an aside I actually found this quite frustrating myself because I don't like reaching for sed in the n:m case (I always forget and end up piping head to tail) and ended up writing my own tool for essentially this style of slicing input, also replacing probably my least favorite use of my least favorite Unix tool, dd, to slice arbitrary byte sequences. The tool doesn't feel overloaded and I use it quite often.

    (I'm sure many people have written this same tool. There is probably a widely known open source option that I've just never come across)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    The head and tail programs also do completely different things. What differences in options do they have?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

    "This program sucks because it doesn't come with the world's most confusing GUI and doesn't do a trillion things"

    If you ask this person what "technically inferior" actually means you'd probably get a different answer every day.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 53 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    It's not people disliking it that makes no sense to me; everyone has their opinions.

    I just can't imagine having the level of anger displayed by some of the most vocal of the anti-systemd crowd.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 31 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    If your favorite thing is being ruined and you can't stop it, I can understand frustration being displayed as anger.

    It's the same when Windows users get angry at things like OneDrive. It's forced on them and they don't want to have to work around removing it like people having to work around how Gnome is integrated into systemd.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 8 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    If your favorite thing is being ruined and you can't stop it, I can understand frustration being displayed as anger.

    That's the joy of open source though: you can stop it. You are free to use another init system, fork projects, etc. With Windows, you can't do any of that. Since it's closed source, workarounds that may be temporary are all you can do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 29 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    That's the joy of open source though: you can stop it.

    Not really. Unless you are prepared to devote your life to changing the source code to what you want, you have to accept it. And because you forked you are no longer downstream and will have to spend the rest of your life keeping up with patches.

    It's not much different than Windows. You could write a OneDrive uninstaller but you will have to spend the rest of your life with patches every time MS updates and breaks your uninstaller.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    I mean we are literally on a couple of open source solutions communicating using an open protocol probably using some sort of open OS.

    https://nosystemd.org/ is a thing. I dont have particularly strong opinions on the matter.

    You don't need to do it alone. In fact, people can come by, fix some things, then go about life. Or donate money instead of resources. If you have used lemmy/piefed/mastodon/peertube in the past, theres a tiny bit of my code in there that makes things just a tiny bit better. Thats not a brag or anything, its just that multiple people can contribute.

    But I hear the frustrations. There is a certain mindset you have to have, hopeful you and others can build something....or with enough hatred to build out of spite. Sometimes thats hard to do with everything else in life. Sometimes the best thing to do is to accept and move on. Or go looking for new solutions without maintenance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 week ago

    That's the joy of open source though: you can stop it. You are free to use another init system, fork projects

    That and a big company looking to manufacture a perceived advantage by aggreasively pushing their shit into the mainstream - good fit to be taken over by IBM - who can bankroll the slapdash dev and bully ISVs, and you're set.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • [–] [S] 23 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (4 children)

    There's also a few cases of feature and scope creep, including the infamous systemd-resolved.
    Systemd, your job is to launch services, manage logs, and do timers and relaunches on a service crash. DNS is out of scope, leave that to existing services.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 6 days ago

    resolved is entirely optional and disabled by default, I use it on case of non-mobile devices but leave it on laptops etc.

    DNS resolution isn't something exotic, it makes sense for systemd to implement it in a simple optional daemon

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 6 points 6 days ago (1 child)

    You've misunderstood something.
    systemd-resolved is one of the services that uses systemd's service management system
    You're saying "don't use this service management system to manage your services"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] [S] 6 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    What systemd binary is the worst offender, in your opinion?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • [–] [S] 14 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    The other day on a thread here about "people who use other init systems, why?" and i wrote about my experience with systemd and git downvoted for mysterious reasons. Other people that did the same as me also got their downvote sixpacks. And now they want to make it seem like it's just the people that hate systemd the annoying ones...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 6 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    There are too many people who use downvote to disagree with cogent and well written points.

    I try to only downvote if something is obviously trolling, in bad taste, or wildly stupid.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 6 days ago

    Hey, just wanted to let you know that I downvoted your comment. Mainly because I think it's funny when people can't come up with compelling arguments and complain about being downvoted instead, but also because I'm part of the conspiracy making sure that people vocally complaining about systemd seem really annoying and wrong.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)