Should we plan on systemd ?

[CharlesV]

Something rather interesting approached me the other day. One of my 'people' that I turned onto Linux and setup with MX Linux asked about systemd and it if was something they needed to learn.

Having really only read about systemd, and only ever worked with sysvinit, my initial reaction was 'well, MX has both, you can check them both out.'

And then, attempting to live as I speak, I decided that I should learn more about it and give it more than a quick look. As I work with it more and more, I am kind of baffled by why people really like it. It seems to be moving / moved to a more 'monolithic OS approach' and away from the smaller, more precise control that I have always appreciated with Linux. (At least in my opinion, and my tinkering so far - I see what people are writing about when they say 'large'.)

But what really hit me was it *does* seem like more and more distro's are moving to it... and so my real question ... (and yes, I DO realize this is a VERY loaded question :-) )

Should we be planning on a future of sytemd?

[MadMax]

I think MX ships with systemd-shim which isn't the full systemd package one would get by running e.g. vanilla Debian. It's just an additional layer that allows programs that depend on systemd to run. @Devs: please correct me if I'm wrong here.

One of the many reasons I use MX on my main computer is that it doesn't use systemd, so I'd favor against a switch to that. I like having this alternative to all the mainstream distros.

All that said I think it will become more and more difficult to sustain a systemd-free environment. It gets baked deeper and deeper into the system with time going forword. At work, for example, we run RHEL servers that just use systemd - no other options provided. As one of the admins I have to know systemd-related commands (systemctl, journalctl ...) and how to manage systemd units (i.e. services) or else I will be getting in trouble pretty quickly. So I think knowing systemd *IS* an important skill.

[MXRobo]

@CharlesV You know that my linux knowledge is very limited, so….

But from basic linux sites and such, I was under the impression that there is a slow trend to move away form systemd because it's so huge and complex, but maybe it's the "Der Baader Meinhof Komplex", or Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon/effect (frequency bias), although the former wasn't a horrible movie.
++EDIT- I guess my impression was incorrect - sorry. End Edit

And IIRC, MX does use the systemd-shim, and D.O. says use systemd if you want to, like for snaps, etc. - all basic statements of course.

Cheers!

[timkb4cq]

It depends in part on what the systemd developers do.
Debian, our base, uses systemd by default and systemd library packages are dependencies for a lot of the system, so we need to include (a patched version of) systemd in our packages (just not allow it to control everything if we wish to run sysvinit instead).

Systemd-shim requires a few patches to systemd to allow it to run the libraries without systemd controlling the boot. If the systemd devs change things enough that those can't be updated to work we'll have a tough choice to make. But we won't know for some time yet what version of systemd the next debian stable release will use and whether or not we can maintain the status quo.

[DukeComposed]

But what really hit me was it *does* seem like more and more distro's are moving to it... and so my real question ... (and yes, I DO realize this is a VERY loaded question :-) )

Should we be planning on a future of sytemd?

I sure hope not. DistoWatch maintains "not systemd" as a specific init option in their search so you can still find decent distributions. Even the vote for Debian to adopt systemd was contentious, shady, and unwelcome, and as I recall there are plans for restoring multiple inits in Debian as first-class citizens.

The DistroWatch list currently contains 96 entries, many of which are, or are based on, stable and mature codebases like Slackware and Gentoo. It also contains non-Linux projects like BSD- and Solaris-derived operating systems. In some cases, these OSes don't just not include systemd, they just plain old don't support it. In others, they can't run systemd and never will.

A bunch of these distros existed long before Lennart's blog post. And they will exist long after that blog post is taken down. There is a culture of UNIX that systemd is systematically attempting to bulldoze, and its attempts to rearchitect Linux into a monolithic Windows-like jumble of interdependencies is completely opposite to that culture. When you get so upset over "Do one thing and do it well" that you end up rewriting dozens of other subsystems -- poorly -- it becomes clear that it's no longer being done for any technical benefit. It's just a political power grab.

[AK-47]

And then, attempting to live as I speak, I decided that I should learn more about it and give it more than a quick look. As I work with it more and more, I am kind of baffled by why people really like it. It seems to be moving / moved to a more 'monolithic OS approach' and away from the smaller, more precise control that I have always appreciated with Linux. (At least in my opinion, and my tinkering so far - I see what people are writing about when they say 'large'.)

I think systemd is OK as an init system, but not a great DNS resolver, session manager, NTP client, etc. I think the approach they are trying is to create a system layer for Linux that can adapt to modern hardware, but in doing so they have accidentally (or on purpose?) increased the scope well beyond that. Could be why their version numbering is beyond 255.

At least Linux wasn't stupid enough to adopt wonders such as svchost, rundll32 or the registry... yet!

[richb]

Technical issues and what is behind the scenes aside, as a regular daily user of MX 23, how does this affect me?
I boot to sysvinit or systemd and I can detect no difference.

[CharlesV]

@richb So... the 'biggie' in my head is relearning how to work through issues. (I *still* consider myself a Linux noob and while I think some of my Linux tech is pretty good, some is still gaining ground, there is A LOT more that I still need to work on.)

Everyone else - thank you for your contribution here! I *think* DukeComposed is roughly where I am at in thought of this ( ie "I sure hope not")... but think the handwriting on the wall is closer to what Tim said and as such as reinforces my question. (At least in my head).

[richb]

@CharlesV I have had very few issues. Perhaps because I stay within the MX repos and do not install "exotic" stuff. Browser, security camera application, texting, email, LibreOffice Suite ,Dolphin File manager, and the Mx Tools, standard stuff MX is a tool for me not an experimental platform.

[CharlesV]

@CharlesV I have had very few issues. Perhaps because I stay within the MX repos and do not install "exotic" stuff. Browser, security camera application, texting, email, LibreOffice Suite ,Dolphin File manager, and the Mx Tools, standard stuff MX is a tool for me not an experimental platform.

And that definitely makes a big difference too. I have had a few oddities, but I push my machines pretty hard and while I tend to stay off problem software, I do bend things around a bit sometimes :()

It is *always* interesting to me what a 'standard users' machine is. Many people stay within a set of guidelines... but quite a few are just over that line and not really 'power users' ... just working it more.