Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (710 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-project] Re: [opensuse-factory] The road to systemd for openSUSE 12.1
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 04:33:58PM +0200, Guido Berhoerster wrote:
* Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@xxxxxxx> [2011-06-16 16:20]:
and with Debian and Ubuntu two
major distros have already opted out of that.

'That' means systemd? Debian is very active in systemd development, and
Ubuntu hasn't decided anything, besides the fact that the original
author from Canonical has left, and is no longer developing Upstart.

AFAIK Debian plans to offer it as an option but as default due to
systemd being Linux-only,

Debian offers _everything_ as an option, so that's not an issue here.

from a quick glance at the upstart repo it seems that upstart is
actively maintained.

It has minor bug fixes but no new development. It is essentially
end-of-life.

So the major
distributions participating in this "standardiaztion" seem to be
Fedora, oS, and possibly Mageia/Mandriva.

You forgot about Gentoo and Arch and a raft of other minor distros that
have all contributed to systemd development and integrated it into their
systems already.

So please, this isn't an issue at all, the entire rest of the Linux
community is moving to systemd, as a chance to standardize a lot of the
cross-distro differences, we can not, and should not, ignore that at
all.

Sure the agendas of a whole lot of people. Like every actively
maintained project.

Systemd tries to solve the system service management, not just to
replace init. It was clear from the beginning, and it wasn't started to
just replace SYSV. It will be some sort of a base system on its own.

Judging by the current speed of adoption by distros, and the dropping of
SYSV support by many of them, and the pressure coming from the
enterprise people for advanced features, I don't think there is much to
discuss on the general direction in the future, unless someone comes up
with something else on top the current stuff.

Anyway, better join the development now, if you don't like the direction
and want to influence things.

I guess that would not be very fruitful since I have rather
fundamental concerns about the architecture and scope an
init-replacement for openSUSE should have. While systemd
certainly provides some attractive features over plain sysvinit
such as automatic cgroup assignment and process supervision (the
latter of which can of course also be provided by runit or
deamontools on top of sysvinit or fsc on top of FreeBSD rc), the
monolithic design and centralization of functionality to replace
all kinds of unrelated things (handling mounting, LUKS encrypted
volumes, changing system locale, time, and hostname, ConsoleKit,
per-user session-handling etc.) is IMO a bad idea in terms of
security, flexibility, and long-term maintainability (and ripping
out systemd in order to replace it with the next big thing will
not be fun). It is particularly inflexible and intransparent to
admins who want to customize or change all the built-in
functionality are now forced to read/write C code for that rather
than being able to modify a simple shell script.

Care to propose a valid alternative then? Just "not liking it" isn't
really an acceptable critique.

In different usage screnarios such as a e.g. web or DB server systemd
carries around a complex codebase with a lot of useless functionality
and dependencies which cannot be easily stripped off.

Why would you want to strip it off? And it's not more complex than
other parts of our startup code at all.

It also forces one to run DBus which serves no useful purpose on a
server but needlessly adds a new potential attack vector.

dbus is already running on your server, and will be in your kernel soon,
so what's the problem here with it? It's been audited numerous times,
and sure, there might be a bug in it or two, but it is one of the most
reviewed pieces of code on your system than anything else.

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-factory+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread