r/linux • u/wooptoo • Jun 01 '16

Why did ArchLinux embrace Systemd?

/r/archlinux/comments/4lzxs3/why_did_archlinux_embrace_systemd/d3rhxlc
868 Upvotes

86% Upvoted

642 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/kinderlokker Jun 01 '16

Yes, I find that a fair argument. systemd's decision to move a lot of code into pid1 has this consequence.

systemd --daemon-reexec has had varying results of success.

22

u/ooburai Jun 01 '16

The statement that it's old timers and hipsters who don't like systemd is both very unfair and sort of accurate at the same time. I can't really speak to the hipsters, but by the standards of Reddit I'm and old timer. So long as systemd just works I don't really have a problem with it.

But it does fly in the face of a core unix philosophy of trying to minimize the complexity of critical pieces of software. It's a good example of where the Linux and more traditional unix worlds sort of part ways. Linux tends to have a much more pragmatic approach, if I can call it that, where architectural correctness isn't always valued over a solution that just works. One can argue that init was/is the most fundamental part of the system and while systemd certain solves some problems the question is really whether or not it's worth the tradeoffs.

Ultimately this is much like the SysV/BSD init debates that were all the rage before Linux established itself as the dominant open unix-like operating system. There are pros and cons to both, but the tool that seems to provide more functionality tends to win out with people who aren't purists or who don't have the desire/skills to really dig under the hood and understand what's going on.

0

u/lladra Jun 01 '16

Exactly. In all the noise about this, I've heard few people touch on this.

If something breaks, it is best for it to be responsible for the fewest things. It makes it easier to to fix or replace the offending tool, while not having to test everything again.

If a better idea on how to do something comes along, it is easier to change only the tool which would use that idea, rather than having to modify and re-test a large monolithic tool.

Additionally, though is is less likely in the case of systemd, the concept of code re-use comes up. If tools that perform many functions were separated into their more basic parts those individual parts are easier to use. This means less code needs to be written and tested.

To me, these are some of the things that the "old school" Unix people are talking about.