why a service misbehaved, can’t get smart from that log dump
configuring DNS, got annoyed that it was yet again something Systemd does itself and in a poor mans way, despite there being tools and standards for tens of years.
Then found out about their security track record and that it all runs as PID 1 (more power than even root)
All in all, it works very contrary to my experience that layers upon layers leads to unmanageable complexity and inefficinecy and it’s all implemented in a poor way, functionally (some will likely disagree to this).
Thanks for the response. Right now I do not have enough knowledge to judge for myself if systemd is effectively great or not. Once I have the time I will check closer kernel architecture (theoretical wise), then in how the Linux kernel is effectively organized and only after that understand the theory behind systemd. I’ve seen several threads where 2 very different camps exists, but I was not entirely sure of the information I was getting.
Cannot say I will get around this, but for sure peeks my curiosity
Linux is a kernel. The kernel modules, services, userland, etc. are all modular and can be used independently. Not so with systemd (at least how it’s implemented in most distros).
I actually seen some people with this Lind of opinion regarding systemd, but I still do not get the hatted about it.
Can you elaborate what is so terrible about systemd?
Ah no, please don’t start another thread like this. We’ve had our experiences, that’s it.
It may have been a thing discussed ad nauseum on certain threads. I just wanted to understand if there are facts that make systemd bad in general
Well, my experience was
All in all, it works very contrary to my experience that layers upon layers leads to unmanageable complexity and inefficinecy and it’s all implemented in a poor way, functionally (some will likely disagree to this).
Thanks for the response. Right now I do not have enough knowledge to judge for myself if systemd is effectively great or not. Once I have the time I will check closer kernel architecture (theoretical wise), then in how the Linux kernel is effectively organized and only after that understand the theory behind systemd. I’ve seen several threads where 2 very different camps exists, but I was not entirely sure of the information I was getting.
Cannot say I will get around this, but for sure peeks my curiosity
The unix philosophy is that a piece of software should do one thing, and do it well. Systemd does a dozen things, all of them poorly.
Systemd is not a singular thing, it’s a collection of a lot of things.
Yes, that’s the problem.
Linux is not a singular thing, it’s a collection of a lot of things.
Linux is a kernel. The kernel modules, services, userland, etc. are all modular and can be used independently. Not so with systemd (at least how it’s implemented in most distros).