Web lists-archives.com

Re: If Linux Is About Choice, Why Then ...

On 4/10/17 9:32 PM, Ric Moore wrote:

On 04/10/2017 09:37 AM, Greg Wooledge wrote:

Does that mean systemd is the ideal replacement?  No.  Systemd has these
overreaching tendrils in places it's got no business sticking tendrils.
Why does it have its own ntp daemon?  Why does it implement file system
automount behavior?  These things already exist as userspace processes.
Mature, trusted userspace processes, sometimes with multiple competing
alternatives already.

But then on the other hand, what else would you use instead of systemd?
Nobody has proposed a superior alternative yet, that I've seen.

So, IMHO, the best thing to do is to use systemd, but don't use any of
its optional intrusive tendrils.  Other people have other opinions, and
that's awesome.  A healthy, vigorous competitive environment benefits
all of us.

If and when you start to manage a cluster, the need for those "tendrils" become apparent. You will need autostart and auto-restart features close to kernel level processes on node failures. SystemD seems to foot that bill. Ric

Funny thing, I don't hear folks who run clusters agitating for systemd - perhaps the contrary. They want far more granular control of their systems than some huge monolithic blob of code that doesn't always behave as desired.

Miles Fidelman

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra