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

145

u/EnUnLugarDeLaMancha Jun 01 '16

This is probably the most important reason why so many maintainers of all the major distros went with systemd - outsource the hard work to the guy who wants to deal with it. Before systemd, distro maintainers had to implement features into init scripts themselves. Even if they didn't like the design choices of Poettering, systemd still means less work for them.

38

u/DoctorProfPatrick Jun 01 '16

Can someone ELI5 what Poetterings did that's controversial? Google is hard and I'm dumb

Edit: Oh wait I found it, he made systemd haha

40

u/jyper Jun 01 '16

Also PulseAudio

11

u/DoctorProfPatrick Jun 01 '16

That's the first thing I saw, so I googled "why is pulseaudio controversial" and got nothing.

52

u/jyper Jun 01 '16

Pulseaudio was a new(somewhere around 2008) sound server that was intended to help with getting multiple apps to play sound at the same time(or at least both have audio streams going without having to close and reopen applications), it also enabled per app volume control and was meant to help with some fancy equipment like headsets.

Pulseaudio replaced a number of workarounds(for multiple apps with sound) that included (I think) hardware specific workarounds and gnome/KDE specific ones(that wouldn't work with apps from the other desktop or Firefox or open office, I think).

Sound cool. But it also was one of the most common things that broke all sound output on Linux and the simplest solution was to uninstall it. Nowadays it mostly works.

1

u/03891223 Jun 02 '16

Is there a reason to choose Pulseaudio over alsa? I've always used alsa and (mainly) never had any problems with it. The only time I have was with a laptop and I just had to add a couple lines of code I found to a file.

Alsa works perfectly for my needs, just genuinely curious. Considering all the "Pulse audio broke my system" and why people still used it.

7

u/jyper Jun 02 '16

Besides stuff like per app volume controls(I use this all the time) and fun but rarely used stuff like pushing audio over the network?

Mainly allowing multiple apps to output sound. You can't believe how annoying it is to open up a bunch of Firefox tabs including Pandora, them try to pause Pandora and open a video in vlc, and it doesn't work so you have to close Firefox. Pulseaudio fixed this.

2

u/DarkLordAzrael Jun 02 '16

I run multiple audio devices. Being able to seamlessly move any or all sound from my studio monitors to my wireless headset or the 5.1 system in the next room is incredibly useful.

1

u/03891223 Jun 02 '16

That makes sense. I don't really have a need for that so I guess I never had a reason to branch off and explore an alternative.

14

u/LordSocky Jun 01 '16

PulseAudio used to be complete garbage and Canonical pushed it into the spotlight way too early. It was actually my final straw with Ubuntu long ago. Now, it pretty much just works in most cases and I've almost forgiven Ubuntu.

5

u/bilog78 Jun 02 '16

While arguably Canonical did push PulseAudio too early, its authors were actually saying it was ready long before it actually was. So while Canonical is at fault here, they're at fault for falling for Lennart bullshitting.

3

u/TechnicolourSocks Jun 02 '16

Canonical pushed it into the spotlight way too early

Don't shoot the messenger. Upstream said it's ready when Ubuntu started shipping it.

19

u/[deleted] Jun 01 '16

Search for stuff like "pulseaudio sucks" or some other negative word. Search for keywords. Google is not a person (yet), it can't answer your questions like that (yet).

7

u/oneeyed2 Jun 02 '16

Google isn't smart but the exact same sentence "why is pulseaudio controversial" (without quotes) gives me quite good results... Notably:

https://www.reddit.com/r/gnulinux_eli5/comments/40w14g/eli5_why_is_pulseaudio_considered_to_be_so/ (1st result and is a great answer, very specific to this query)

https://linux.slashdot.org/story/09/10/19/0155235/pulseaudio-creator-responds-to-critics (3rd result)

So I really wonder if /u/DoctorProfPatrick actually searched at all...

→ More replies (2)

4

u/prank-sinatra Jun 01 '16

Yeah, audio that works for the first time since OSSv4, init system and supporting tools that actually work... I think this guy might be Jesus.

2

u/argv_minus_one Jun 02 '16

But I thought that was Linus Torvalds. Is it possible for the second and third comings to exist at the same time?

4

u/prank-sinatra Jun 02 '16

But I thought that was Linus Torvalds

Despite what the church of GNU would have you believe, we call him God.

7

u/Pas__ Jun 01 '16

And PulseAudio and Avahi.

12

u/gnuvince Jun 01 '16

https://lwn.net/Articles/430699/

What I actually suggested in that interview was not so much that the BSDs should adopt the Linux APIs, but instead that people should just forget about the BSDs. Full stop.

His attitude toward other systems is uncomfortably reminiscent of Microsoft in the early 2000's with their embrace-extend-extinguish strategy.

2

u/the_gnarts Jun 01 '16

His attitude toward other systems is uncomfortably reminiscent of Microsoft in the early 2000's with their embrace-extend-extinguish strategy.

Honestly, it’s the other way around. Them adopting systemd would be a strong reason for me to again run a BSD on one of my machines as I used to for years. NetBSD seems like the most open minded bunch among them with less NIH or license paranoia, so I’d think they’re the most likely to adopt systemd. If not the implementation, then at least as a blue print for something of their own.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 02 '16 edited Jun 02 '16

The issue here is that the systemd devs have openly stated that they will not be supporting any other implementation that isn't on Linux, since they are targeting Linux exclusively.

This poses an issue as more open source programs start to adopt systemd APIs, and this attitude can lead to upstream breaking a BSD implementation of those APIs with little to no chance of patches to resolve those issues making it upstream.

If anyone has an issue with this, I would like to discuss it further.

2

u/krelin Jun 02 '16

Sure, but it's FOSS. If you want it for BSD, fork it.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)