• Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    4 days ago

    Systemd-boot and the service files and timers are pretty neat. Works fine as an init too I guess

    • wabasso@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Those are the features I’m most interested in. Do you have a tutorial / resource you can recommend?

      The man pages are, as with most Linux, technically sufficient. Just very hard to digest if I don’t have four hours of interrupted time.

      • vinyl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        From experience when I look for something “easier to digest” I end up spending more time tinkering and fucking about than just reading the man pages because the latter usually had a lot more context about the software and any other weird quirks.

  • afb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    I don’t hate systemd, but I prefer OpenRC and usually use it on my Debian systems. My preference is purely vibes based though, and I think most of the anti-systemd arguments in common usage are a bit silly.

  • SavvyWolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 days ago

    Anyone got a good tutorial/guide fir SystemD?

    Figure I may as well try to wrap my head around it if it’s supposedly going to murder me in my sleep or whatever.

      • probably2high@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        And if you’re not a 50 year-old Linux admin, Arch wiki.

        Edit: don’t be put off by the Arch wiki if you don’t use Arch. 99% of the time, Linux is Linux, and you can follow it for just about anything other than package management.

        • vinyl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          That too but arch wiki sometimes doesn’t list all the possibilities the program can do or not, skill issue if you can’t read.

          • probably2high@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            skill issue

            I fully own that. But I like the logical ordering of the page sections on the wiki, and if anything is unclear or info is missing there–which it is pretty rare–I’ll hit up man in desperation

  • Tja@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    I dislike journalctl more than systemd. And I don’t get what’s the advantage of systemctl vs previous solutions, why would that of all things make one reconsider.

    I miss rc.local and crontabs. Now if you excuse me I have a cloud to yell at.

    • Hawke@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      The only advantage I see is that it actually seems to keep a better handle on the status of the process/service. The old-style unit scripts would often get out of sync and not realize that a process had died, or if they did they would repeatedly respawn a service that would just die again. Maybe that was less of a problem in later years than I experienced earlier, but it was there.

      The whole init.d system felt very ad-hoc with every script working a little bit differently, giving different output styles, etc.

  • mittorn@masturbated.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    @pewgar_seemsimandroid systemd has a lot of really good things…
    But it’s too complex for init process and even too complex for service manager. Many solib dependencies causes long start, big memory footprint and possibe security issues. Many things might be implemented in some separate services, running with restricted permissions and optionally disabled.
    initng was very similar to systemd, but was very simple and very much faster

  • Matt@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    Try to pass init=<path to any other init system> and you’ll see reduced RAM usage. Systemd is bloated.

    • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 days ago

      Hell, pass init=/bin/yes and you’ll see even more greatly reduced RAM usage!

      ❯ ps aux | grep /usr/lib/sys | awk '{print $6}' | sed 's/$/+/' | tr -d '\n' | sed 's/+$/\n/' | bc
      266516
      

      So that’s 260 MiB of RSS (assuming no shared libs which is certainly false) for:

      • Daemon manager
      • Syslog daemon
      • DNS daemon (which I need and would have to replace with dnsmasq if it did not exist)
      • udev daemon
      • network daemon
      • login daemon
      • VM daemon (ever hear of the principle of least privilege?)
      • user daemon manager (I STG anyone who writes a user daemon by doing nohup & needs to be fired into the sun. pkill is not the tool I should have to use to manage my user’s daemons)

      For comparison the web page I’m writing this on uses 117 MiB, about half. I’ll very gladly make the tradeoff of two sh.itjust.works tabs for one systemd suite. Or did you send that comment using curl because web browsers are bloated?

      For another comparison 200 MiB of RAM is less than two dollars at current prices. I don’t value my time so low that I’ll avoid spending two bucks by spend hours debugging whatever bash scripting spaghetti hell other init systems cling onto to avoid “bloat”. I’ve done it, don’t miss it.

  • neox_@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    Français
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    Well, I think that if declarative configuration is what you’re looking for, the GNU Guix distro with its GNU Shepherd init system might be a more pertinent solution than SystemD

    • lime!@feddit.nu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      some other init systems just use scripts for config, meaning you can just do whatever

        • lime!@feddit.nu
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          a config file can do only what the program that reads it allows. if the program that reads the file is just bash…

        • vinyl@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Limits and constraints are set by the program that reads the config, so no, not whatever. The only way that is a thing, if the program stated that the configs can do whatever, which at that point, is a script.

          Also if a config can do what ever, then most likely that’s a security vulnerability.