How did systemd infect major distros as fast as it did?

there is nothing wrong with it. all it does is make linux 'less' like unix. who cares.

>>57220003
/thread

It breaks the Unix way. Instead of doing one thing and doing it well, it does several things and does it well. Makes it easier for distro maintainers.

>>57219988
Red Hat pushed it hard. God only knows why though.

>>57220015
gnu not unix

>>57219988
They got one of udevs core developers on that project, and convinced him to tie all the udev tools into systemd. That way they forced everyone to keep building systemd to get the tools necessary to boot. That's how they started the infection.

>>57220040
They would rather help maintain it than init. If red hat does some crazy shit it usually works out for them.

>>57220003

It does more than that. systemd encapsulates a number of functions that an init system should not. I don't think Lennart is going to be satisfied until systemd assimilates the entire Linux kernel.

>>57220015
Instead of doing one thing and doing it well, it does several things. We can agree on that part.

Can someone explain what exactly SystemD is and why some are opposed to it?

>>57220101

if var = * ; then
         * = abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz0123456789

>>57220101
It's an NSA sponsored effort to insert backdoors into Linux.

>>57220101

It's a bloated, unstable init replacement that keeps assimilating more functions than an init system should. Some people like the old init system and want to stick with it, but most major distros have switched over to systemd and refuse to maintain separate branches for users who still want to use init. That leaves them with distros like Gentoo and Slackware, and of course BSD since it uses a whole other system.

File: 1447670463460.jpg (49KB, 423x734px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 423x734px

>>57220101

"YEah guise fuck systemD(ickhead) it doesn't go with the Unix-way"

"Emacs is the greatest"

>>57220101
Some people are opposed to it because it breaks the Unix way of doing one thing and doing it well instead of doing a metric fuckton of things averagely. Other people don't like it because there are large portions of it that still haven't been audited before being pushed on everybody.

It's easier for distro maintainers, and distro maintainers call the shots.

>>57220003
It's also an NSA baccdoor.

>>57220156
So a drug user from the 40's vs a well engineered modern solution who is lead by a drunk?
More accurate than I would have thought

File: wikipedian_protester.png (108KB, 560x560px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 560x560px

>>57220152
[citation needed]

is there a way to repalce systemd with init? i want debian without it! halp me. what does stallman think of it?

>>57220101
It's the new hotness

>>57220207
Devuan

>>57220203

One should assume that any insufficiently audited piece of code may contain backdoors, or at the very least may be unstable or present security concerns.

Don't be a jackass

>>57220207
>what does stallman think of it?
Just look at emacs to see what stallman thinks of bloated software

>>57219988
because it was better than what we had before

File: perfect_day.png (60KB, 700x700px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 700x700px

>>57219988
Systemd was adopted quickly because the people who work on distros are intelligent enough to know it's a good thing.

>>57220286
[citation still needed]

>>57219988
By providing great libraries and services and much needed unification.

>>57220348
t. Pöttering

>>57220207
>>57220291
Stallman seemingly has no posted opinion on systemd. I did my searx-fu and found nothing.

By being good.

>>57220472
He said its good that its open source but doesn't have enough information to tell whether its bad or not.

>>57220496
I know that, namefag. Open Source means no backdoors, like GNUL

>>57220496
What distro is he using?

>>57220544
I use Parabola, a FLOSS version of Arch Linux with a deblobbed kernel, with my bios changed to be FLOSS as well.

>>57220544
Stallman uses gNewSense.

>>57220609
Wrong. He uses Trisquel.

https://www.stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

>>57220003
>there is nothing wrong with NSA botnet
kill yourself lennart

>>57220015
>does it well
Except when I have to force run a script once I log in to disable it's daily update checking that locks up dnf/zipper/apt/etc. indeterminately.

>>57220669
give me some proof, then, niggerface. what? you don't think the nsa doesn't intercept http(s) or tcp/udp and harvests everything that is sent i/o? you also don't think the nsa has computers that can break anything encryption algorithm?

>>57220015
>and does it well
kek, systemd shills never cease to amaze

File: 1463084513258.jpg (274KB, 1414x965px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 1414x965px

>>57220792

>>57219988
It solves problems that SysV init solves poorly or not at all.

Example: systemd keeps track of which processes belong to which services. SysV doesn't - it can't, actually, since all it really does is run scripts in response to certain events. This is useful not only if you want to know that information directly, but it makes restarting services easier and more reliable.

>>57220835
how about sellinux then should we get rid of that as well?

Key, I'm f*cking tired of the fact that you don't fix problems in the
code *you* write, so that the kernel then has to work around the
problems you cause.

Greg - just for your information, I will *not* be merging any code
from Kay into the kernel until this constant pattern is fixed.

This has been going on for *years*, and doesn't seem to be getting any
better. This is relevant to you because I have seen you talk about the
kdbus patches, and this is a heads-up that you need to keep them
separate from other work. Let distributions merge it as they need to
and maybe we can merge it once it has been proven to be stable by
whatever distro that was willing to play games with the developers.

But I'm not willing to merge something where the maintainer is known
to not care about bugs and regressions and then forces people in other
projects to fix their project. Because I am *not* willing to take
patches from people who don't clean up after their problems, and don't
admit that it's their problem to fix.

Kay - one more time: you caused the problem, you need to fix it. None
of this "I can do whatever I want, others have to clean up after me"
crap.

>>57221755
explain

if just a few of these "i-its too big to be audited" faggots got together it wouldn't be such a huge task, I mean they certainly have shown their autism, they're pretty much perfectly suited for the job

Because in the Linux world, systemd is the best thing since sliced bread. Wayland along with systemd will bring about the year of the Linux desktop.

File: apple programmers.jpg (19KB, 665x279px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 665x279px

>>57219988
DEs depended on logind because nothing else did what it did, as minimul neckbeards don't do multi-local-user workstations ever

Nobody wants to support two init systems just for DEs, so they adopted systemd and threw the old systems in the trash

>>57223751
I am looking forward to Wayland as well.

>>57223837
You can't actually name what it does that "nothing else did", can you?

Stop repeating things you read without understanding kid.

>>57221640

Systemd is has a much larger scope than SElinux. And that is the problem. Too large, encompassing a lot of very important functionality, changing and growing rapidly, with no concrete auditing measures in place. Red hat is pushed very hard to get it through. (They also do a lot of business with the NSA, which leads some to believe that they're may be more to systemd than many think)

And the icing on the cake is that the core team developers include some of the most asshole devs in the Linux community (Poettering, Sievers and co.). You'll show them a clear bug, and they'll tell you there's nothing wrong with it, ignoring the glaring fault in their shittyass code.

Overall, nobody is saying that the old init system was great. It was shit, but it worked and was easily audit-able. The idea of a better init system is great, but systemd in it's present form is not the answer.

>>57219988
idk im not using it because it makes my hardware crash and wifi stop working randomly so I removed SystemD and used SysVinit instead, I like SysVinit. I'm on Debian btw

OpenBSD 6.0 doens't have that problem.

Idgaf, I use PCLinuxOS and Texstar is based enough not to taint our magic distro with that shitware.

>>57219988
Becaue they wanted the D

>>57220101
it started out as a system initialization service, but now it's pretty much an all-in-one interface for configuring one's computer (as the name implies), used to start or stop background programs, schedule when programs start or stop, boot up the system, fuck about with the firewall, etc.
At this point saying it's still only an init system is just as retarded as calling computers photoshop machines.