On Fri, 12 Sep 2014 10:06:59 +0200 Anders Wegge Keller <wegge@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 17:37:13 -0600 > Kevin Fenzi <kevin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Well, sorry you think so. I think systemd is far from perfect, but > > it's a good deal better than what we had before. > > Do you know of a place where I can find the analysis behind this > assessment, or is it just your personal opinion? I was stating my opinion. Based on almost 10 years working on Fedora, 25 or so years working on computers. > For me, the limited > gains, are far exceeded by the additional risk and complexities that > comes as part of the bundle. I'd really like to see your analysis as > to why systemd is better for your use case. Then I'll tell you in > detail why it doesn't at all improve my situation. I already posted something like this in the last long, mostly useless systemd thread in here. :) From that email: "A few that I really appreciate: If you did a 'service stop foobar' it would try and stop foobar, but if the pid file was stale, foobar started other stuff that wasn't tied to foobar as a parent, or any other of a number of situations I have run into, parts of foobar would still be running. With systemd, if you stop a unit, it's really stopped. All of it. If you started a sysvinit service foobar and wanted to look at it's output, you had to hope the needed info was also in a log file or kill the service and restart it in some non standard mode to watch it's output. With systemd/journald, ALL output is saved and easy to query. If for some reason you had to modify a complex sysvinit script, you then would have to merge in all changes with package updates over time. With systemd you can use a .d directory to add/change things without overwriting the provided systemd unit file." I'll add in no particular order: * unit files are vastly simple to write. I created some unit files for some irc bots I run in about 5minutes. This would have taken copy and pasting bunches of stuff to make a sysvinit script that wouldn't have worked as well. * Setting some buggy service to restart on failure is trivial to do. * Log querying with journalctl is great. I can easily look at the messages from the previous boot (no matter when it was) or the one before that. I can look at just output from one service, etc etc. Anyhow, I could go on, but I think at least some of the folks on this list (Not sure if you are one of them) have made up their minds, and nothing I can say will convince them otherwise. In that case, we should probibly just agree to disagree and move on. If not, I am happy to help folks track down and report bugs with systemd, or if you have questions on how to do something in particular or if there's some case that could be improved. > > I'd say the chances of Fedora switching away from systemd at this > > point are pretty much 0, so if you can't learn to live with it and > > help improve it, I wish you the best of luck with whatever distro > > you end up using. > > As the only alternative is Slackware, one might as well stick > around. Since I'm stuck with RHEL at work, I relly haven't got much > choice in desktop distro. Fair enough, do as you like indeed. However, I don't see that it helps anyone to have a "systemd is horrible" thread every month that consists of bunches of people saying how much they hate it without any positive outcome. ;) kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
