Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Debian Ubuntu Linux

Debian Technical Committee Votes For Systemd Over Upstart 379

Posted by timothy
from the process-as-process dept.
sfcrazy writes "Bdale Garbee,chairman of the Debian Technical Committee, called for a ballot from the TC to chose the default init system. The votes are in systemd is the clear winner here. Bdale himself voted for systemd."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Debian Technical Committee Votes For Systemd Over Upstart

Comments Filter:
  • Incorrect summary. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Heraklit (29346) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @12:31PM (#46203373) Homepage Journal
    Please. Get your facts straight.

    the default init system for Linux architectures in jessie

    • How is that misleading? The next release of debian is codenamed jessie, apparently.

  • Soooo.... (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Having been a well behaved, not overly vocal member of the slashdot community for many years (10? more?), today, I found myself banned by ip. and my Karma (which has always been neutral) reduced to "terrible".

    I had posted 10 times over the last 48 hrs, in support of the slashdot boycott. Most sensible debate, some houmour.

    You know once the powers that be need to silence those who gently disapprove, that it's all gone terribly wrong, and those pushing for change that damages everyone are too weak to even mak

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You are not alone. It's been the same here for me. I had the karma maxed and now it's terrible.
       
      Fuck you, Dice motherfuckers. I'll join the boycott in a few hours.

      FUCK BETA

    • Gee (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Ultra64 (318705) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @12:48PM (#46203493)

      Who would have thought there would be consequences to spamming every article with whining and bitching?

    • Thank You Slashdot (Score:2, Insightful)

      by SuperKendall (25149)

      Justice is served. Keep up the bans and let's get rid of the deadwood.

      I fully support the rights of a bar to throw out the belligerently drunk - that's not censorship, it's called caring for your customers. None of us are here to read moronic posts about website style changes. We are here to read insightful commentary on technical stories and if you can't handle that, you do not and should not belong.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I fully support the rights of a bar to throw out the belligerently drunk

        The problem is the drunk one is the barkeep. The patrons told him to stop before he wrecks to whole place, but there is no stopping him. Every day he gets drunk and wreaks half the bar. Soon he'll be drinking alone. And it all started with that damn game of Dice.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by seyyah (986027)

          The problem is the drunk one is the barkeep. The patrons told him to stop before he wrecks to whole place, but there is no stopping him. Every day he gets drunk and wreaks half the bar. Soon he'll be drinking alone. And it all started with that damn game of Dice.

          So leave. If the new redesign is as bad as promised, I'll leave when the time comes. No need to ruin Slashdot ahead of schedule.

          • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

            by dmbasso (1052166)

            Hopefully your kids are going to take the same stance (ignoring the issue) when you start dying of cancer. Then after you die, they can find another dad.

        • The patrons told him to stop before he changed the wallpaper and took away the pool table, but there is no stopping him.

          FTFY.

    • Re:Soooo.... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by inasity_rules (1110095) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @01:41PM (#46203903) Journal

      Well, I haven't been banned, but my regularly scheduled mod points have not appeared. All I did was mod up some of the more polite and reasoned anti-beta posts... The "Fuck beta" posts are anatomically improbable, and likely less than helpful, but I ignored them and left them where they were.

      I am a late joiner (7 digits), but was an AC for a long time before I registered. I await the outcome of this situation. As far as I can tell, beta isn't being forced on us yet, and if it is, well, perhaps it is time I left /. behind anyway. It has been fun. :)

    • by bug1 (96678)

      If your using this sites comment system to try and destroy this site with a boycott, why do you expect to have good karma on this site ?

      • by bsolar (1176767)

        Because he expects the community to agree with him. Karma should reflect what the community thinks of his activity, not what the site's admin thinks, so it should be possible to have positive karma on this site even posting negative comments about it, as long as the community supports them.

        So either the admin tampered with his karma against the community's intentions, or the community is not as impressed with his activity as he thinks.

    • Re:Soooo.... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by sandertje (1748324) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @03:13PM (#46204673)

      Please, for FUCKS sake, can you guys please stop bitching over Beta? We all don't like it, but I guess /. got the message now.

      Now, back on topic: Good choice Debian. Seeing Canonical ruins all projects it gets its fingers on, implementing Upstart would've been a baaaad idea.

  • Glad this is over (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    It's a shame to see a bunch of Canonical shills on the Debian Technical Committee though. This should have been strictly between OpenRC and systemd, but the Canonical shills were trying to push Upstart even though it's a buggy piece of shit that is inferior to systemd in every way.

    • by RDW (41497) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @01:40PM (#46203891)

      ...but the Canonical shills were trying to push Upstart even though it's a buggy piece of shit that is inferior to systemd in every way.

      So wait, you're saying that narrow corporate interests were trying to push their own inferior solution in place of a technically superior system strongly preferred by the userbase? There seems to be something vaguely familiar about this scenario, but I can't quite put my finger on it...

      • by Brama (80257)

        strongly preferred by a vocal minority who arrogantly THINK they represent the entire userbase.

        FTFY.

        Luckily they have now thrown in their own windows by acting like total assholes. Good riddance.

  • More on systemd... (Score:5, Informative)

    by MAXOMENOS (9802) <maxomaiNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Sunday February 09, 2014 @12:39PM (#46203443) Homepage
    ...here [freedesktop.org].
    • by bug1 (96678)

      Apparently this is the most important information, from the front page.

      Spelling

      Yes, it is written systemd, not system D or System D, or even SystemD. And it isn't system d either. Why? Because it's a system daemon, and under Unix/Linux those are in lower case, and get suffixed with a lower case d. And since systemd manages the system, it's called systemd. It's that simple. But then again, if all that appears too simple to you, call it (but never spell it!) System Five Hundred since D is the roman numeral for 500 (this also clarifies the relation to System V, right?). The only situation where we find it OK to use an uppercase letter in the name (but don't like it either) is if you start a sentence with systemd. On high holidays you may also spell it sÃstÃmd. But then again, SystÃme D is not an acceptable spelling and something completely different (though kinda fitting).

  • by cfreeze (146454) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @12:40PM (#46203453) Homepage

    I didn't really know much about systemd being a ubuntu user, but found this giving more background on the story: https://wiki.debian.org/Debate... [debian.org]. The wiki does a good job detailing the technologies. Given the information, the choice of systemd is interesting.

    • Or, the CLAs are the Slashdot Beta of OSS Communities?

      I do not know, just keeping the flame alive... ;-)

    • by Fubar420 (701126) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @01:11PM (#46203649)

      You're looking at the upstart position document:

      https://wiki.debian.org/Debate... [debian.org] and https://wiki.debian.org/Debate... [debian.org] represent broader parts of the debate.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Which are filled with bad logic. For example:

        Systemd is often said to be too big for the functionality of an init system.

        However it is much more than init, and if you take into account all the functionality it can provide or replace, you’ll soon find out that it takes less lines of code than the alternatives, in a language (C) that takes less memory to execute.

        This is not the point or benefit of the original UNIX and much of the

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by ustolemyname (1301665)

          This is not the point or benefit of the original UNIX and much of the Linux architecture. By doing small tasks well, a reliable toolchain can be built of those small tasks. *OF COURSE* a monolithic megamonster is going to have fewer lines of code than all the different components shoe-horned into it. And of course *it's going to get details wrong* in those individual components, but the monolithic megamonster may rely on those flaws or make debugging of them unreasonably difficult.

          I can only assume that all people who support this argument run GNU Hurd, as it's a microkernel, instead of that 16,000,000+ line of code "monolithic megamonster" known as the Linux kernel.

          • by evilviper (135110)

            I can only assume that all people who support this argument run GNU Hurd, as it's a microkernel, instead of that 16,000,000+ line of code "monolithic megamonster" known as the Linux kernel.

            Just because you can point to one microkernel that doesn't really work, and one monolithic kernel that does, will not invalidate the perfectly valid points made about the benefits of modularization. Yours is just a logical fallacy:

            eg. "I'm sure everybody that likes bicycles never drives a car..."

            • by ustolemyname (1301665) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @05:41PM (#46205685)

              Just because you can point to one microkernel that doesn't really work, and one monolithic kernel that does, will not invalidate the perfectly valid points made about the benefits of modularization. Yours is just a logical fallacy:

              eg. "I'm sure everybody that likes bicycles never drives a car..."

              Except it's not valid points made about modularization in this context. It's a blanket statement that modular is better, for which a single counter example is sufficient to disprove. The AC's post didn't mention specific flaws with systemd, instead they asserted generalizations about how modular is better than monolithic. Just because there are potential benefits to a modular system over a monolythic system does not mean a specific modular system is better than a specific monolythic system, leaving the AC's post as little more than FUD.

  • Beware journald... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Junta (36770) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @12:57PM (#46203561)

    I don't think I have much qualm about systemd as it relates to the init process. However, the people behind systemd push *hard* that text format logging is some anachronistic evil and that files on disk should just be binary. They do some pandering to the crowd by saying to run something like rsyslog alongside systemd, but that seems pretty counter to the other areas where there is an emphasis on running as few processes as possible (ambition to replace at, cron, change from running static number of getty on VC specified by inittab to on demand spawning of getty as auto detected). It's clear they regard users valuing plain text data with some disdain. There is plenty of opportunity to achieve the gains whilst concurrently providing a plain text stream to peruse natively, but they have *zero* interest in trying to pursue such paths.

    This is also the brainchild of Lennart Poettering, who has had a track record of getting stuff widely into distribution critical usage path before it's ready (avahi and pulseaudio have given me lots of headaches). Also trying to get DBus into the kernel, which seems absolutely bonkers.

    In general, distributions embracing this become increasingly opaque to admins. Distribution behavior flows through an increasingly complex labyrinth of crap that it approaches Microsoft level BS. I'm somewhat disheartened at the possibilities here.

    • by fnj (64210) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @01:14PM (#46203675)

      In general, distributions embracing this become increasingly opaque to admins.

      Essentially all important server distros have caved at this point. RHEL7 is systemd. Pretty sure SuSE and Mageia are (or soon will be) systemd, if there are any of those left. Arch for the server dangerous-livers is systemd. Now Debian.

      I would call all of them lemmings (except Red Hat, which is the actual instigator), except realistically what were they to do? Get left by the wayside? The writing on the wall is clear. For me it's enough to pay a lot more attention to BSD.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Narcocide (102829)

      I too, lament the apparent impending demise of sysvinit shell script startup and plain text logging/process handling. Functional transparency in Linux booting was a good thing, and it will be missed. It seems more to me like these people arguing so hard over whether to replace sysvinit with upstart or systemd as though just leaving it alone was not an obvious option are more interested in changing the Linux init system to something inherently less secure and more obfuscated so that they can leverage it as

      • by gweihir (88907) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @09:51PM (#46207191)

        Indeed. "Those that sacrifice reliability for speed will neither have reliability nor speed." --me

        And all that for something irrelevant like boot times. What I do not get is why so many people are so stupid about this. Maybe the NSA is pushing for the worst possible system so they have plenty of places to break in? Or to push people away from Linux? The thing systemd reminds me of most is IPSec, which we are now know to have been deliberately NSA-sabotaged by increasing its complexity.

    • by Peter H.S. (38077) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @02:17PM (#46204215) Homepage

      I don't think I have much qualm about systemd as it relates to the init process. However, the people behind systemd push *hard* that text format logging is some anachronistic evil and that files on disk should just be binary. They do some pandering to the crowd by saying to run something like rsyslog alongside systemd, but that seems pretty counter to the other areas where there is an emphasis on running as few processes as possible...

      I was sceptical about binary log-files too in the beginning. However, I didn't have to play around with the journalctl tool before I realized that systemd's logging is far superior to any existing simple text logging.

      stuff like "journalctl -b 2" (only show logs from previous boot) and "journalctl -F _SYSTEMD_UNIT" (show all systemd units that have ever written to the logs) are pure gold. The amount of tab-completion with everything is just so nice. Try "jou (TAB) -F (TAB)" and it will show all possible values.
      You get logging info from much earlier in the boot process then previously, and with kdbus something that will get even earlier and later in the boot process and when shutting down.

      journalctl works great with all the usual text tools like grep, just think of it as a super 'cat' with god-like sorting powers.

      Forget what others sneers about Poettering and systemd, and give it a proper workout with a distro that supports it properly, like Fedora 20 or similar. Make up your own mind by actually using it.

      This is a good starting point:
      http://www.freedesktop.org/wik... [freedesktop.org]

      To me it is clear that systemd simply is the future Linux plumbing system, and to me it is a quite brilliant solution as it is now.

      Especially logging is a huge improvement. Novices can for the first time actually do usable filtering without knowing arcane programs and switches. A simple "journalctl -b -p err" will reveal much of interest for the novice trying to debug a problem. (shows all messages of priority levels ERROR and worse, from the current boot).

      And because the log is structured in db form, there will be GUI logviewers that are actually useful, and that can do filtering and sorting by eg. error levels, monotonic timestamps etc.

      • by Junta (36770) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @06:30PM (#46206077)

        I realized that systemd's logging is far superior to any existing simple text logging.

        I accept that is the case, but the approach threw out the baby with the bathwater. They could have maintained first class support for plaintext data either alongside or indexed by their binary blobs. I have used journalctl and it does have theoretically useful features. I have to say that, in practice, I've never found myself in particular need for what journalctl has added and only have used it to see that I could do it. There wouldn't have been a downside. They would have had the capabilities and performance they wanted, and the cases where an utterly trivial to read chunk of data would still be preserved.

        • by Peter H.S. (38077)

          Just run syslog alongside journald, and you will have all what you are used to have. You even gain many benefits like earlier logging in the boot and other things. You can even turn of that journald uses any storage space or binary logs, but just let it forward everything directly to syslog.

          Personally I don't find it needed, though I ran my Fedora desktop like that in the beginning until I weaned off my old fear of binary log files.

          • by fnj (64210)

            Heh, I would have phrased it a bit differently: "Until I threw my prudent caution about relying only on binary log files to the wind". But as long as I don't employ you in IT, it is only a preference. And hey, I don't rule out that I might evolve to the same preference.

        • For a long time I"ve told people that the difference between Windows And Linux is that then Windows there is a menu somewhere, and if what you want to isn't on it, you can't do it.

          There's no menu for Linux, no limits. Till now. If Lennart hasn't thought of your use case, or doesn't care about it, then it's not going on the menu.

          .

      • by fnj (64210)

        The amount of tab-completion with everything is just so nice. Try "jou (TAB) -F (TAB)" and it will show all possible values.

        Can you elaborate on this? I am on Arch with systemd, typing in a bash cl, and tried exactly your "jou (TAB) -F (TAB)" example. Just as I expected would happen, the first tab filled in "rnalctl ". So far so good. Every arbitrary command has done this for years. And, just as I expected would happen, the second tab did nothing until I repeated it a second time, and then offered me a list

    • by skids (119237) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @02:28PM (#46204313) Homepage

      This is also the brainchild of Lennart Poettering, who has had a track record of getting stuff widely into distribution critical usage path before it's ready (avahi and pulseaudio have given me lots of headaches). Also trying to get DBus into the kernel, which seems absolutely bonkers.

      That's disenheartneing to hear, considering how many times I have had to hack the hell out of my init scripts to kill avahi because I DO NOT WANT IT, and the fact that pulseaudio came in and made a mess where jackd was just starting to make things sane, and the time spent would have been better spent improving jackd.

      But on the other hand, jackd had that unfortunate attempt to fork into a C++ reimplementation, and lost its (never fully supported) ability to run as a systemwide daemon so background daemons could use the soundcard, and pulseaudio has since turned an about face and started supporting a systemwide daemon, more RT features (AFAIK not quite yet up to snuff with what JACKd offered) and has been less of a general nuisance recently.

      So, there's something to be said for software that starts out as inferior but due to the charisma and/or persistance of its proponents, eventually manages to get a larger development community, because that community will beat it into shape, and hopefully manage to shed as much cruft left over from the inferior design through a concerted deprecation effort. It's a hassle to us users, but works out eventually. It looks like this has happened and will continue to happen with systemd.

      We could avoid that if the competent projects were somehow given an injection of participants, but people that write necessarily-complex code generally tend to spend most of their time doing just that, not glad-handing on mailing lists, whereas the authors of insufficient simplied solutions have more time to politic. The only part about that that stings is that the latter often uses the former as a cheat-sheet going forward and does not bother to give credit,

      • by Peter H.S. (38077) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @04:14PM (#46205091) Homepage

        I think Pulseaudio was a great step forward for sound on Linux. Yes, it did uncover many sound card driver bugs, and bugs in Alsa back in 2004, but that also meant that those bugs got fixed. My internal sound chip was somewhat flakey before pulseaudio, and PA simply broke it completely, but that also meant, that when the bugs was fixed, the sound chip driver and Alsa layer worked perfectly ever since. I just used a popular and well supported SB compatible sound card instead while the bugs where fixed.

        At the time, every other sound daemon was neither system wide, nor working properly. PA solved all problems in a rather elegant way, so for nearly a decade Linux have had an excellent and powerful sound deamon. Sound just work, and the "per application" sound volume is worth everything.

        That PA is really good and actually solves real world problems, is evident by the absence of any serious competition to it. If PA ever was so bad as some people like to claim, why didn't alternatives spring up instead?

        Sure, PA doesn't do low latency stuff like Jack, but it was never meant to. Instead PA works in perfect unison with Jack, in that it can suspend itself when certain programs need low latency sound operations, just like PA works on top of Alsa, not replacing it.

    • by Grishnakh (216268)

      Instead of copying my post about this very thing elsewhere, I'll just link it here:
      http://linux.slashdot.org/comm... [slashdot.org]

      I really think this plaintext logfile business is overblown.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday February 09, 2014 @01:21PM (#46203725)

    Their recent updates have broken udev so badly, that Gentoo decided to fork udev to retain the old design. Debian should pay attention.

  • Upstart was unnecessary in Ubuntu. Systemd is not necessary in Fedora or Debian.

    There are other ways to get fast boots, without create another monolithic do-everything daemon with spaghetti dependencies.
    Basic software engineering principles (and Unix principles), should tell you that do-everything daemons, like upstart, systemd, hald are bad ideas.

    With such complex, unmodular core Linux systems, Linux based OS's will grow increasingly more unstable and insecure.

    Also, systemd and upstart make Linux much les

  • by Bryan Ischo (893) * on Sunday February 09, 2014 @02:37PM (#46204391) Homepage

    This is good because it will get systemd onto even more systems, which will hopefully be a forcing function for improving it so that it's more usable.

    The introduction of systemd into my distros of choice (I was a heavy Arch Linux user until this year, when I switched back to Fedora after a ~8 year absence) has caused me more problems that any other single change to any part of the Linux operating system in my history of its usage (and I've been using Linux since 1994).

    I'm at the point in my life where I just want things to work; and I found that systemd has in many places not worked well. I wholly believe that the problems are generally due to the implementation of the individual services, and not bugs in systemd itself, although I suspect that the 90 degree turn taken by systemd and its associated complexity are the genesis of the problems in the individual services themselves.

    In particular, I've found that systemd on Fedora cannot properly start up an NFS server. I have a post-start up script that I run manually to start NFS because no matter what I do, it does not seem possible to force systemd to start all of the requisite NFS services. systemds tools for figuring out what could be going wrong are, I am sure, complete, but very impenetrable to a person who wants to understand the minimum necessary to fix a problem.

    Additionally, it seems to be easy to break systemd's boot scripts in a way that prevent systemd from being able to boot the system (it's happened to me over and over again through what seemd like innocuous user actions), and I have never successfully gotten systemd to boot into its recovery shell. I can get to the recovery shell but I can never type anything into it, it seems like there's something borked with the way it handles keyboard input somehow.

    In summary, systemd is much less mature than init ever was, which, combined with its tendency to reimplement everything and thus de-evolve much of what used-to-work into no-longer-works-easily, has resulted in whole system failures at a rate that I have never, ever experienced before under Linux.

    All that being said, it's pretty clear that lots of Linux distro maintainers are more excited by the few advancements that systemd makes over the old init system, than they are put off by the lack of maturity and quality of systemd; therefore, systemd is an inevitability, and I'm glad that debian is taking it now, because it will mean even more developer effort towards fixing its problems.

    In short: more pain for other people, making them more likely to fix my problems for me. So I'm happy that debian is doing this to their users, for my benefit.

    • by gweihir (88907)

      "Forcing it on many systems so that it gets improved as to be more usable." WTF? Are we now cloning the MS business model as well? If this thing is not rock-solid, highly usable and in a final state, it has no business at all being a default init system, except in highly experimental installations.

      • I don't care if it's in a final state (no software ever is). However, I echo the OP's lament that pushing out software that does half of what the old software did, half as well, seems to be a common and distressing mode of operation among too many developers. KDE 4.0, Unity, Gnome 3, etc., would have been a lot more acceptable if it was at least as functional as what it replaced. The common pattern seems to be throw out beta software, spend two years sorting out the issues until most users are satisfied, an

        • by gweihir (88907)

          Indeed, very true. Or the myriad of stable window managers (I use fvwm, one major update in the last 15 years), instead of trying to clone Windows with KDE and Gnome and never really reaching an usable, mostly stable state.

          This may be a result from more and more commercial development going into Linux: These people have to justify their existence. With LaTeX, fvwm and other "stable" things, things get fixed when they are broken, not before. And if they are not broken, they just stay unbroken.

          The other thing

  • honestly, i would rather have something that is known to work in the long term and not need update to patch bugs or possible changes to the config file implementation. let's just use something that we know works.

    on the other hand, couldn't it be an optional package (a package is required but there are multiple to choose from) with the default as systemd?

  • by wonkey_monkey (2592601) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @02:44PM (#46204455) Homepage

    ...is that "systemctl" is a lot of keys to type, and the last four are all consonants.

    At least "service" is an actual word.

  • by gweihir (88907) on Sunday February 09, 2014 @09:32PM (#46207077)

    I am not putting a convoluted, megalomaniac-spawned and KISS-violating atrocity like systemd on my systems. The binary log-format alone is a faux pas to severe as to invalidate the whole thing. Are there any good server-distros left that stay away from systemd or that are at least commited to maintaining a different init system longterm, preferably the classic SysV init?

    Of course systemd will fail eventually (once enough people realize it is a bad clone of what Windows does and makes things worse, not better), but I am unwilling to wait that long or tolerate all the disadvantages this thing brings in the meantime.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 10, 2014 @12:11PM (#46210677)

    read more about it at: http://ewontfix.com/14/

"Anyone attempting to generate random numbers by deterministic means is, of course, living in a state of sin." -- John Von Neumann

Working...