Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday May 30 2016, @06:44AM   Printer-friendly
from the fed-up-with-the-UNIX-take-over dept.

The spreading of systemd continues, now actively pushed by themselves unto other projects, like tmux:

"With systemd 230 we switched to a default in which user processes started as part of a login session are terminated when the session exists (KillUserProcesses=yes).

[...] Unfortunately this means starting tmux in the usual way is not effective, because it will be killed upon logout."

It seems methods already in use (daemon, nohup) are not good for them, so handling of processes after logout has to change at their request and as how they say. They don't even engange into a discussion about the general issue, but just pop up with the "solution". And what's the "reason" all this started rolling? dbus & GNOME coders can't do a clean logout so it must be handled for them.

Just a "concidence" systemd came to the rescue and every other project like screen or wget will require changes too, or new shims like a nohup will need to be coded just in case you want to use with a non changed program. Users can probably burn all the now obsolete UNIX books. The systemd configuration becomes more like a fake option, as if you don't use it you run into the poorly programmed apps for the time being, and if they ever get fixed, the new policy has been forced into more targets.

Seen at lobsters 1 & 2 where some BSD people look pissed at best. Red Hat, please, just fork and do you own thing, leaving the rest of us in peace. Debian et al, wake up before RH signed RPMs become a hard dependency.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Monday May 30 2016, @03:16PM

    by digitalaudiorock (688) on Monday May 30 2016, @03:16PM (#352643) Journal

    They don't want to - that would mean extra work.

    I'd say it's much more insidious than that...the more stuff they can make dependent on their shit the better right? After all, that's pretty much what started all this...that inexcusable, malicious systemd dependency in Gnome. This way they can bail out Gnome stupidity with an even more stupid fix, and further entrench themselves in the Linux landscape...all part of the plan. This won't get tolerated forever though...it's getting so bad that something's got to give.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2, Disagree) by pvanhoof on Monday May 30 2016, @05:25PM

    by pvanhoof (4638) on Monday May 30 2016, @05:25PM (#352685) Homepage

    The systemd dev doesn't make shit depend on them. Other projects make their shit depend on systemd. That means that systemd provides a service to those projects. Something they don't want to invent themselves. I'm guessing it has something todo with uniformity on building applications that interop with other services and other applications. D-Bus was a first step almost a decade ago. We all had our own motherf. stupid IPC systems. It was pure hell. The debates where childish and stupid. Now most projects use D-Bus and all is quite good.

    Same now. We all have our own motherf. stupid cruft and crap to deal with containers and other services. A lot of softwares are being written with D-Bus just to get service activation, while they shouldn't be activated by D-Bus only. Think NetworkManager & co. Developers don't want to care about having twenty different ways to do simple stuff.

    Maybe in future systemd will be replaced by something else more innovative. But by the time systemd will be ready; at least it will have pioneered an API. Hopefully that won't have to be redone too many times.

    • (Score: 2) by http on Monday May 30 2016, @06:02PM

      by http (1920) on Monday May 30 2016, @06:02PM (#352693)

      Systemd is both mechanism and policy.

      --
      I browse at -1 when I have mod points. It's unsettling.
      • (Score: 2, Disagree) by pvanhoof on Monday May 30 2016, @06:54PM

        by pvanhoof (4638) on Monday May 30 2016, @06:54PM (#352715) Homepage

        The policy and crafting of an API around it, is precisely what developers want and need. They don't want twenty different ways of interacting with containers and services. And they definitely don't want to write goddamned hundreds of fscking scripts that suck the blood out of veins.

        Instead, they want to package policy in clear and well defined configuration. Then they want to make-distcheck that. Then distributions will install it and will provide clear and well defined overrides. You know, like almost every modern package and system does. Even ld.so.conf has support for something like /etc/ld.so.conf.d.

        This /etc/init.d/ stuff, stinks.

        No. fucking. scripts.

        • (Score: 2) by Geotti on Monday May 30 2016, @10:27PM

          by Geotti (1146) on Monday May 30 2016, @10:27PM (#352792) Journal

          This /etc/init.d/ stuff, stinks.

          [puts on sysadmin head]

          Fuck you!

          • (Score: 2) by Geotti on Monday May 30 2016, @10:29PM

            by Geotti (1146) on Monday May 30 2016, @10:29PM (#352793) Journal

            s/head/hat/

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:55AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:55AM (#353000)

              No, the original was much better.

              Swapping head spaces every so often is healthy exercise

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:52AM

          by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @09:52AM (#352999)

          Errr no. I do not want any of that.

          Perhaps you could ask me what I want next time instead of speaking for me.

        • (Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday May 31 2016, @05:31PM

          by sjames (2882) on Tuesday May 31 2016, @05:31PM (#353123) Journal

          No. Policy is to be determined by the sysadmin. APIs are supposed to be the interface to the mechanism by which policy is implemented. That mechanism needs to be policy neutral.

          This was figured out a long time ago and it works well. Mechanism setting policy is broken by design.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by TheGratefulNet on Monday May 30 2016, @08:50PM

        by TheGratefulNet (659) on Monday May 30 2016, @08:50PM (#352753)


        Systemd is both mechanism and policy.

        yeah... and soon it will include such roles as being a floor wax as well as a desert topping!

        --
        "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 30 2016, @06:07PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 30 2016, @06:07PM (#352696)

      Yank consolekit, introduce logind. Merge udev with systemd. Turn upower/powerkit into a wrapper around logind (yes, these days logind is the actual process that suspends your laptop when you close the lid).

      https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2010-September/000391.html [freedesktop.org]

      • (Score: 1) by pvanhoof on Monday May 30 2016, @06:59PM

        by pvanhoof (4638) on Monday May 30 2016, @06:59PM (#352717) Homepage

        You need to add the relevant context before quoting somebody, especially Michael Biebl. He's one of the best packagers on this planet. As one of the maintainers of Tracker I saw him endlessly pushing for upstream (that's us) fixing their shit. If one guy has anything to say about all this, to me, it's Michael Biebl. To Michael, I listen. Because of respect.

        Here is the important piece of context you should think about not once, but each and everytime you decide to write whatever on systemd:

        " ... so that they stop supporting deviating solutions for these things where there's really no point at all in doing so."

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 30 2016, @07:11PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 30 2016, @07:11PM (#352722)

          Err, the email is from Poettering, responding the Biebl raising a issue with how systemd changes would interact with debian sysv back in 2010. It is Poettering that is stating quite clearly that systemd intends to make it bothersome for distros do things in any other way than the systemd way.

          • (Score: 2, Insightful) by pvanhoof on Monday May 30 2016, @08:18PM

            by pvanhoof (4638) on Monday May 30 2016, @08:18PM (#352743) Homepage

            Sure, but Michael also isn't disagreeing with it. Two developers talking to each other. Nodding.

            No reason for you to take things out of context for. Also. Read the entire mailing list and conversation.

            Out of context,is out of clue. The conversation is and has been going on for years now. Listen. Stop your ideology. And listen.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 30 2016, @08:44PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Monday May 30 2016, @08:44PM (#352752)

              Not sure who is the ideologue here...

              • (Score: 2, Interesting) by pvanhoof on Monday May 30 2016, @09:12PM

                by pvanhoof (4638) on Monday May 30 2016, @09:12PM (#352760) Homepage

                Yes. Fair enough. I understand that I'm a systemd 'fan'. But I did do my part of the work, evaluation. I investigated it and I have experience.

                I do understand the criticism and I do understand the so called "UNIX philosophy". Ok. Still. Some things of systemd are good.

                I am one of the nodding software developers. I have criticism. But I also nod to Lennart's (and other's) idea's.

                I say: go ahead Lennart (and others): do. it. (and they are doing it -- which is a good thing).

                They can be sure that we'll review. We'll scrutinize. Hard. We won't review shit that isn't done. That nobody does. We won't review ideas from bitchers and whiners.

                Your code, or go away.

                • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @10:15AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @10:15AM (#353003)

                  Sigh.

                  See. Therein lies the problem.

                  So-called? Really? Likely this philosophy is older than you. The least you could do is show some respect.

                  Look, you write like you are part of the systemd crew, or are on their bandwagon, in the thick of the glorious revolution. I invite you to step outside and join us in the ditches at the coalface. Yes, the work can be messy. It can smell. Oh can it reek. It can be fun. But by whatever deity or whatever binds your sanity together I strongly suggest you never say these things in an actual work place in front of people who have to wake up at 3am in the morning and fix whatever system screwup occured.

                  You think scripts are nasty. Sigh. Have you had a job maintaining hundreds of servers across sites spanning cities? Have you ever encountered just even one of the omfg what the heck caused this type of problem with managers standing around talking about uptime and money? Do you have two decades experience administrating servers and applications? Can you appreciate a well configured environment that you walk away from at 6pm knowing that at 8am it will be running fine just like it was when you left?

                  Because it does not sound like it.

                  Consider this. The next time someone expresses a dislike of systemd it may not be solely due to their philosophy. It may be because in the hard cold world we inhabit anything that makes life worse is not worth suffering through. Like being woken up at 3am.

                  Perhaps you have this type of experience and simply enjoy pain. I certainly do not. Nor does any admin I know, even the bastards. Something all good admins have in common is the driving need for the system to be up and available. If you cannot see this or seriously disagree then perhaps you are in the wrong profession.

                  OTOH feel free to learn this the hard way. Get a job as a linux sysadmin for a large company. Have your say. Make your opinion heard. See what happens.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @11:24AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 31 2016, @11:24AM (#353015)

                    Fucking fans. Spectators. Free to say anything they like. Never actually get dirty.

                    A long post which could better have been: Get off my lawn!

                • (Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Tuesday May 31 2016, @05:58PM

                  by sjames (2882) on Tuesday May 31 2016, @05:58PM (#353139) Journal

                  There may be some nice features to systemd, but the price is orders of magnitude too high. There are just too many ways to get the same value without the abominable hairball. And certainly without using the abominable hairball as a coercive tool to keep competing ideas out.

                  I'm guessing by bitchers and whiners, you mean anyone who declined the cool aid.

                  Have a look at tmux and the well established existing mechanism and API for terminating user processes on logoff. Now USE IT. Tell Gnome to fix their code rather than screwing everyone else over so they can paper over their bugs.

                  Funny, they have been shown the code and still aren't interested. Guess I was right about the cool aid thing.

    • (Score: 2) by sjames on Tuesday May 31 2016, @05:28PM

      by sjames (2882) on Tuesday May 31 2016, @05:28PM (#353121) Journal

      Other projects end up depending on systemd when they will otherwise be broken by systemd. In much the same way as businesses voluntarily join the neighborhood protection organization sponsored by the local wise guys.

      The vast majority of this crud has been from freedesktop.org, the same people who decided to evicerate Gnome.

      I'm glad to hear that tmux won't be going along with this.

      As for dbus, it's a miserable and overcomplex mechanism that also needs to go away or at least get properly documented.