yeah I just hate the move away from flat text files honestly. Its one thing I did not like about windows NT with the registry. databasing up the config.
well its text but its just a bit more complex of a flat file. like yaml. like one thing I really liked about cisco ios was how the config file the commands where pretty much the same thing. granted thats not unix but its the simplicity level that is ideal to me.
systemd config is inspired by INI, with section headers and key-value pairs. It doesn’t get much flatter than that. It doesn’t compare to YAML or JSON.
If systemd was only managing services there would be less opposition. People opposed don’t want a single thing doing services and boot and user login and network management and…
IDK, ask them. There are some in this thread. I’m addressing the strawman argument that people against it are luddites set in their ways over their beloved cron jobs.
If you use a debian-based system, unless you have actively looked at the DH source, the one thing that built virtually every package on your system, you do not get to say anything about “bloat” or “KISS”.
DH is a monstrous pile of perl scripts, only partially documented, with a core design that revolves around a spaghetti of complex defaults, unique syntax, and enough surprising side effects and crazy heuristics to spook even the most grizzled greybeards. The number of times I’ve had to look at the DH perl source to understand a (badly/un)documented behavior while packaging something is not insignificant.
But when we replaced a bazillion bash scripts with a (admittedly opinionated but also stable and well documented) daemon suddenly the greybeards acted like Debian was going to collapse under the weight of its own complexity.
Oh yes, fuck dh with a rusty pole. I’ve had to paclage some stuff at work, and it’s a nightmare. I love having to relearn everything on new compat levels. But the main problem is the lack of documentation and simple guidelines
“I hate systemd, it’s bloated and overengineered” people stay, perched precariously on their huge tower of shell scripts and cron jobs.
That’s bloat. I start all my services manually according to my needs. Why start cupsd BEFORE I need to print anything?
thats what systemd sockets are here for
or inetd!
And built poorly by people who don’t work well with others and then payola’ed onto the world.
Fucking UNIX is shell scripts and cron jobs, skippy. Add xinetd and you’re done.
yeah I just hate the move away from flat text files honestly. Its one thing I did not like about windows NT with the registry. databasing up the config.
Which part of systemd’s config is not text-based? The only “database” it uses for configuration is the filesystem
well its text but its just a bit more complex of a flat file. like yaml. like one thing I really liked about cisco ios was how the config file the commands where pretty much the same thing. granted thats not unix but its the simplicity level that is ideal to me.
systemd config is inspired by INI, with section headers and key-value pairs. It doesn’t get much flatter than that. It doesn’t compare to YAML or JSON.
ini as in windows init files?
Yes
If systemd was only managing services there would be less opposition. People opposed don’t want a single thing doing services and boot and user login and network management and…
Are they also opposed to coreutils being a single project with dozens of executables doing different things?
IDK, ask them. There are some in this thread. I’m addressing the strawman argument that people against it are luddites set in their ways over their beloved cron jobs.
Wait until you learn about
debhelper.If you use a debian-based system, unless you have actively looked at the DH source, the one thing that built virtually every package on your system, you do not get to say anything about “bloat” or “KISS”.
DH is a monstrous pile of perl scripts, only partially documented, with a core design that revolves around a spaghetti of complex defaults, unique syntax, and enough surprising side effects and crazy heuristics to spook even the most grizzled greybeards. The number of times I’ve had to look at the DH perl source to understand a (badly/un)documented behavior while packaging something is not insignificant.
But when we replaced a bazillion bash scripts with a (admittedly opinionated but also stable and well documented) daemon suddenly the greybeards acted like Debian was going to collapse under the weight of its own complexity.
Oh yes, fuck dh with a rusty pole. I’ve had to paclage some stuff at work, and it’s a nightmare. I love having to relearn everything on new compat levels. But the main problem is the lack of documentation and simple guidelines