So I had the chance to try Ubuntu 16.04 in a server production

Is there a question here?

>>61760804
systemd is more a benefit to servers than anywhere else.
I can see why you won't use some of the features on your personal computer, but on a server, it makes sense.

>>61760825
Yeah, which one should I go with? Or at least, which one should I test first?

>>61760846
Maybe if you run/rent a 100 machine park it makes sense. Maybe. But otherwise it just gives you a shitload of extra work with zero benefits. I mean what, "faster boot" so my server that I reboot once a year maybe will boot up faster? LOL

>>61760862
FreeBSD.
>Why?
Because I'm a shill and it's good.

File: 1501529905466.jpg (125KB, 1375x749px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 1375x749px

Install Red Star OS!

It's one of the best Server Operating Systems.
Kim also blessed this OS.
It has no bloat, and runs perfectly stable with latest security standards.

File: buckle_up.png (22KB, 675x425px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 675x425px

>>61760903
it's time to buckle up I guess.

>>61760906
lol.
Well if the OS works like communism, I would not expect too many HTTP requests getting served...

>>61760934
Install the handbook when it asks you to. That thing is a god-tier piece of documentation.

>>61760934
>it's time to buckle up I guess.
I wonder how it will work under KVM though. (No judge pls, some servers are running virtualized and I want the same OS everywhere. I mean 14.04 will become unsupported sooner or later, and 16.04 got murdered by systemd. So it's better to find a replacement sooner than later.)

>>61760959
btw how do you like ports?
what ports manager should I use?

I tried to keep my system on Ports once (FBSD9 or so), but they kept breaking left and right. So I realized a full Gentoo like (ports based) system is out of the question. Not that I mind, pkg is more than enough for me I suppose.

But still, what do I use if I need something from ports? What do you use?

>>61760988
They're fine and just werk for the most part, but I usually just use pkg because the default of options are mostly fine for me.
I use portmaster for management.

>>61760804
>gentoo
>servers
At least try to do your larping realistic.

>>61761052
Cheers. FAMP (lel) is up, now trying FTP and then I will move a stack over to see if it werks.

>>61761054
Ok, tell me one reason why Gentoo cannot be used on servers. Go on.

>>61761052
what's the current bash-completion status?
tried:

pkg install bash-completion

but got:

source /usr/local/share/bash-completion/bash_completion.sh

Missing '}'.

FreeBSD using pkg but update your pkg config so it grabs latest/rolling updates rather than quarterly builds:

/etc/pkg/FreeBSD.conf

-  url: "pkg+http://pkg.FreeBSD.org/${ABI}/quarterly",
+  url: "pkg+http://pkg.FreeBSD.org/${ABI}/latest",

>>61761111
Just installed fine for me, but:

The bash-completion port currently does not have a maintainer. As a result, it is
more likely to have unresolved issues, not be up-to-date, or even be removed in
the future.

>>61761150
Hmm that's very neat, I will use that on my desktop. On servers though, the packages seem very fresh.
There is php71, apache24, mariadb10.2, I mean everything one could possibly want.
The server is already up now - gotta move over SQL and the web files to check if everything is a-ok.

>>61761167
Installs, but cannot enable it for bash itself. Like you would have to include it with "source", that's the part it fails.
Tried editing ~/.bashrc as it told me to, but nah.

File: 1.png (7KB, 564x364px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 564x364px

>>61761189
Just tried sourcing it myself and it worked fine.
Have you checked the script itself for the aforementioned syntax error? It's really short.

>>61761228
Fuck me. csh tricked me. ;_;
Thanks!

systemd is basically an attempt to turn GNU/Linux into a Microsoft product, not in a harmless sense like accessibility (like KDE, aka the project Aero ripped off) but in the context of a Lovecraftian testament to design anti-patterns. It is worse than a product of incompetence, because morons are easily controlled. There is technical skill in systemd's development, but the project's goals and intentions are asinine and dangerous, led by people who are too far up their own asses to ever consider themselves wrong about anything.

The free software community will eventually recover, but it'll take some time.

>>61760804
Wow, so you're some kind of genius who know better than the rest of the industry? I'd suggest you you abandon this site full of teens and cartoon girls, it may come back to haunt you if your peers find out.

>>61761435
>ad populum

>>61760804
FreeBSD is the best for servers. Jails, ZFS, no systemd, sysctl, etc.

It's amazing. If you think it's "fine" try it some more and explore its features. It's more than "fine".

>>61761150
No, not on servers. You don't want to reboot/restart programs on servers, so you don't want to update often and you want stability. If there's any reason to use the quarterly release, it's because you're using it on a server.

Just a few weeks ago updates from latest would break perl5, which would break a ton of programs, which would make the server useless until the OS is reinstalled or extra work is put in. There is no good reason to use rolling release on a server.

Can someone explain if Gentoo is superior to Nix OS or GuixSD in their functional declarative approach?

>>61761054
>>61761068
what.cd used to run on Gentoo

>>61760804
>SystemD is fucking cancer on servers.

this is /g/, not /r9k/, dude

>So I had the chance to try Ubuntu 16.04 in a server production environment - and FUCK NO, SystemD is fucking cancer on servers.
Why?

>>61760804
Why do you hate systemd so much? It's faster and easier than sysv.

>>61762114
It is way too enterprisey to my taste.
Maybe if I had 100 servers up in a compound, I could make use of it.
But for general use it's much more harder to use/debug/handle than any other init system.

Also please don't shitpost if you never had to even touch your init system. On Desktop that is rarely ever needed. Even a simple LAMP stack may never require you to touch your init system.

>>61763188
> Faster
As I said on servers it really does not matter.
Hell, even on Ubuntu 6.04 or so I had like 10-15 seconds boot time.
> Easier
Easier in how? The config files are a mess. Debugging some issue? Good fucking luck.
Run into a bug? <Insert poettering shit-eating grin face here>

I am not hating it because it's systemd, in fact I didn't even care until my servers approached EOL. But once I started migrating, my life got much worse.

>>61763662
Also I am just one guy. In the past we had choice what we use... maybe I am just stuck in the past.
It's not that I didn't try to love systemd, I ran it on desktop and virtual machines to learn the quirks, but I just can't.

>>61763662
I'll admit the speed benefit doesn't matter much on servers but it is still nice. But seriously, have you tried writing a systemd unit file? The syntax is ridiculously easy and it looks clean to me. A systemd unit file that's 10 lines long can do the same task as a 50 line bash script. You just have to specify a couple of things: the executable to run, user to run it and what target it should be part of. The only problem I have with systemd is the scope creep. I only want systemd to do init, it doesn't need to do networking or replace coreutils.

>>61764455
I had to build software and write the systemd files for it.
Let me just say, I did not enjoy one part of it.

While yeah, a complex program on a previous init system can indeed grow big, but I can also just go into the file and see what happens, and edit any bit I just need. It's so simple, open and free. Literally what Unix/Linux was all about. It's okay though, FreeBSD seems to be fine as heck now. Still learning the bits and pieces (last used 10 on desktop), but getting there. Currently messing with cron/locate/apache config and then I will mess with letsencrypt (oh the fun).

>>61760804
>gentoo
>production enviroment
Whisky-tango-foxtro

>slackware
>no package management
Holy shit you retard.

Lemme give you the quick rundown on OSs as servers:
>Ubuntu
Computer inept java developer that want to quickly and easily host their web cloud apps' backend. Light usage.

>Debian
Some webserver you don't want to heavy maintain or load up with hipster CSS frameworks. Just regular pages and FTP servers that just work and are stable with little management.

>RHEL/CentOS
Front-facing websites that get more care and attention.

>SUSE/OpenSUSE
Same as above but for Windows adminds

>FreeBSD
High performance, real-world enterprise applications. Internal, mission-critical tasks where you probably are willing to invest your own seasoned dev team to contribute code upstream.

File: 1497126896017.jpg (42KB, 361x369px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 361x369px

>>61763662
>Systemd config files are different than my sysv ones; therfore I think they're a mess
>I don't understand why sysv sucks

Systemd was designed to make system administrators' and developers' lives easier. Why is it so shit to you? Is it because you actually have to learn something new again and you're old? Are you just that set in your ways?

Systemd unit files are easy as fuck to write and dead simple to read even if SOMEONE ELSE who was completely incompetent wrote them. The system journal tells you everything that went wrong with everything at fucking boot AND after startup with a simple command. There's a metric fuckton of documentation for it.

There's a reason why systemd moved beyond the init system and I have my own theories, but let's face it: systemd is what Linux needed in order for it to continue to advance. Shit was getting way too convoluted and people were too brainwashed and familiar with the shitshow to even imagine something different.

>>61765936
>>no package management
>Holy shit you retard.
I said no dependency handling. Because there is none.
How hard is to understand?

>>61763662
network-manager is the more cancerous redhat pajeetware

>>61766200
networkmanager, pulseaudio, systemd... pick your poison.

>>61766046
> There's a reason why systemd moved beyond the init system
To me, it looked like they wanted to sell the "it boots faster" idea, and of course it meant a lot less work for the developers.
Like before they had to develop and maintain their own init system, and now they can just grab and slap systemd on top.
I think that was a big part of why. Canonical had Upstart, but they also jumped bandwagon.

File: 1492539702044.png (511KB, 836x964px) Image search: [Google]

511KB, 836x964px

>>61766957
Those are both valid motives. However, it's much more than that.

The developers of systemd saw inherent problems with the core of the init system and set out to fix it. It fucking worked too, as shown by the incredible adoption rate of systemd. Most major Linux distros have moved to it and for good reason. System admins can focus on other shit.

I kind of compare the bloat of systemd to the bloat of the Linux kernel itself. Most lines of code in the kernel are drivers. This looks like bloat on the surface, but it's able to be easily cut out if desired. The same goes with systemd; the bloat that comes from extending from beyond the init system can be removed as well, if desired. They're not forcing you to do anything. It's just that when it comes to a surface examination, people are instantly put off by a system that handles everything, as it technically diverts from the UNIX "do one thing and do it well" mantra.

The problem was that there were too many things to do and those things were dancing all over each other's feet. Systemd gives that bird's eye view of your system that Linux desperately needed to stay competitive, at least in the desktop space.

Nobody is saying that systemd is perfect; it can still benefit from improvements. Regardless, it's one of the best options out there and the seemingly religious hate for it is definitely misplaced-- not unwarranted, just misplaced.

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-biggest-myths.html

thanks for the input expert on servers that posts on 4chan

>>61768085
> implying there are no sysadmins on /g/
> implying being a sysadmin is something special
it's like one of the lowest paid it job?

>>61768071
Yeah, I know that site, but you could list 100 bad things about it just as well. I would have no issues if everyone adopted Upstart for example.
Now I am just confused. I could either force myself to eat lennart's shit, or just use something else. Will "something else" work fine just like Ubuntu did for many, many years? I don't know. FreeBSD looks alright so far though.

Gentoo could also work, but yeah, I am too lazy to mess with distcc and VPS machines could suffer from the speeds. (Then again Gentoo can just use -j1 as well, so the server can just work normally while on one thread it slowly compiles the updates in the background.)

File: 1494033868339.jpg (135KB, 800x580px) Image search: [Google]

135KB, 800x580px

>>61768767
FreeBSD is a good choice for a server if you know what you're doing.

Hell, you sound like you're supposed to be a FreeBSD user anyway. I dont mean that as an insult; the concerns you have are more or less addressed under FreeBSD.

I don't want to call systemv old-fashioned, but I think that with the way things are going in terms of cloud computing, container instances and the like, a systemd-esque future is here to stay. Maybe they'll fix the init-bounds stepping side of systemd, maybe not. All I'm certain of is that the power and convience that systemd offers is worth it to me and a lot of others.

Just be ready to jump ship from FreeBSD when the support stops coming in or things get even more convoluted when they have to start bending backwards to support applications that rely on systemd.