[Tfug] Recent Systemd thread

[Jude Nelson]

If I had to guess, it's a combination of factors:

* Despite it's architecture, systemd has something in it for everybody.
Many different types of users can get some use from it.
* Systemd takes over a lot of previously distro-specific engineering work
(i.e. service management logic, /etc contents, logging, etc.).  Distro
maintainers, who are almost all volunteers, can save themselves time and
effort by using systemd over sysvinit.
* GNOME depends on systemd-logind, which depends on systemd.  AFAIK, GNOME
has the best internationalization support and HDPI support, which means
that major distros basically have to choose between having GNOME + systemd
or having (crippled GNOME | something else)  + !systemd as the main desktop.
* Systemd solves a lot of user experience issues for desktop users (i.e.
faster boot times, unified system administration, multi-seat support, etc.)
out of the box.
* udev is increasingly tied to systemd (and will likely hard-depend on it
in the future), so from a distro manager's perspective, adopting systemd
now is a good medium-term strategic move if you want to keep decent hotplug
support.
* Most of the core systemd developers are Big Players in Linux, so they
have the political clout to get their software adopted early.  If you run
gitstats on systemd's tree, you'll see that just over 90% of systemd was
written by 10 people, and most of them are responsible for other major
pieces of the Linux plumbing layer as well as kernel development.

I think if all systemd was doing was trying to be Yet Another Init and
Service Management System (without trying to couple itself to
previously-independent projects or force its adoption through politics), it
would be a lot less controversial than it is now.

Just my $0.02.

-Jude


On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Keith Smith <techlists at phpcoderusa.com>
wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> I installed and configured a LAMP / Samba server in VirtualBox this
> weekend and other than the system commands nothing sees much different.  I
> do not live on the server like some of you so my needs are less than yours,
> as is my exposure.  I am a LAMP developer so I only work on Linux when I
> need something.  I also run Linux on my workstation, however that is a lot
> less demanding than being sys admin.
>
> When I first read about systemd a week or so ago I was heart broken.  I
> already miss sys v init. After reading some...  I wondered what the motive
> was?  Feels like an M$ type of take over.  I understand systemd originated
> at Redhat.  What would be their motive and why would most of the distros
> follow?
>
> I always though Linux / Free Unix folks would rebel against such a move?
>
> Is this a coup d'etat or something good?
>
> Keith
>
> --
> Keith Smith
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tfug.org/pipermail/tfug_tfug.org/attachments/20141027/026482b0/attachment-0002.html>