Comment by likeabatterycar
3 months ago
> Systemd is the last init linux will have, and increases the barrier to port software to other unix-likes.
Why would you write portable software that has a dependency on an init system?
> systemd-networkd is one of the most common causes of failure for my desktop
What is objectively worse than buggy networking in systemd is having 26 different incompatible ways to configure networking in Linux.
It is easier to settle on one method (like literally every other OS) and fix the bugs than continually come up with newer, equally buggy and broken, ways of doing it.
> Why would you write portable software that has a dependency on an init system?
Ask the GNOME project.
> What is objectively worse than buggy networking in systemd is having 26 different incompatible ways to configure networking in Linux.
"Linux has 26 different incompatible ways to configure networking. Systemd solves this problem by introducing a 27th way that's buggier than most of the others"???
> What is objectively worse than buggy networking in systemd is having 26 different incompatible ways to configure networking in Linux.
False.
One of those 26 incompatible ways works just fine in the situation where systemd is clearly not working.
It is only your opinion that it is better to have "buggy" networking than to have "not buggy" networking that you think is difficult to configure. That is the exact opposite of "objectively."
> It is only your opinion that it is better to have "buggy" networking than to have "not buggy" networking that you think is difficult to configure. That is the exact opposite of "objectively."
I never said this.
Fix the bugs. Don't fill the well with yet another equally shite solution.
> > It is only your opinion that it is better to have "buggy" networking than to have "not buggy" networking that you think is difficult to configure. That is the exact opposite of "objectively."
> I never said this.
I know you didn't say it was your opinion. You said it was objectively worse. You said:
> What is objectively worse than buggy networking in systemd is having 26 different incompatible ways to configure networking in Linux.
and I think it's pretty clear people have experiences where systemd-network malfunctions in places where a rc.local (one of those 26 incompatible ways) works fine.
That is not objectively worse. So it's only your opinion.
> Fix the bugs.
You can fix your own bugs.
> Don't fill the well with yet another equally shite solution.
Do not confuse some fantasy future version of systemd that has had people like me work on it to make it better, despite its many many issues, with the rc.local script that exists today: Only one of these has a chance of existing.
1 reply →
> Why would you write portable software that has a dependency on an init system?
Because it's not just an init system; it manages to make itself important to a rather lot of the system. A nice page is https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Hard_dependencies_on_systemd#Pa...
Nothing in there looks particularly big or important, though. There was a lot of noise about GNOME and mutter requiring it, but that has been changed as noted on that page. Dbus is a big one, but a) the socket activation feature of it requires integration with or reimplementation of a service system, and b) There is an implementation that works with openRC instead (just not the one mentioned on that page).
I'm using dbus on Artix without systemd. No idea how but it's there.
Dbus itself is another questionable service IMO but it got baked in rather a long time ago and is harder to replace.