Whether you like Systemd or not, let’s not spread disinformation.
All these things still exist with Systemd. They are just called Systemd dash something. Also, while Systemd is feature rich, it is pretty heavy relative to many alternatives.
Distros that avoid Systemd typically do so because they consider it bloated and possibly insecure.
If you are a fan of Systemd, it is probably because you like the standardization and the integration across previously disparate services. That makes sense. If you think it is making your system faster or lighter, you have not explored the alternatives. Obviously Systemd was a big leap forward in init. Other systems have appeared that also work really well but they are probably too late to matter mainstream. The “market” has spoken and Systemd is the winner.
All these things still exist with Systemd. They are just called Systemd dash something
Although you’re right that’s not that “cut and dry” there’s a lot integrated and baked into the systemd core. Even if you consider a “systemd dash something”, let’s say systemd-networkd we’re suddenly talking about a single efficient daemon that covers all networking from basic IPv4 DHCP to IPv6 (with all it’s possible addressing schemes), can act a client or more like a typical router acts, delegate stuff and manage the entire thing from top to bottom in a cohesive way.
Just think about the amount of crap you’ve to setup to have a system do dual stack networking and provide prefix delegation on another interface, with systemd it’s just systemd-networkd. From the basics to serve IP’s, the classical isc-dhcp can do both IPv4 and IPv6, however…
the ISC DHCP server can only serve IPv4 or IPv6, means you have to start the daemon twice (for IPv6 with option ”-6”) to support both protocols.
Or you’ll just find you the implementation is bad and you’ll run wide-dhcpv6 instead. And then you won’t survive without radvd for router advertisements etc.
If you are a fan of Systemd, it is probably because you like the standardization and the integration across previously disparate services. That makes sense. (…) Obviously Systemd was a big leap forward in init.
Exactly, systemd solves tons of painful issues and provides a cohesive ecosystem of tools to manage Linux systems. While there are other great alternatives none as are complete and solid as systemd.
If you think it is making your system faster or lighter
But it may. By not having to deal with bunch of poorly integrated tools such as dhcpcd, dhcpv6, radvd, chrony, NetworkManager, resolvconf, logrotate and others we might actually have less overhead. And I’m not even talking about the time we don’t have to spend making sure all those integrate properly learning 234 different configurations syntaxes and dealing with specific bugs that only happen when program X interacts with program Y with feature Z enabled.
I’m not saying system it perfect, because it isn’t but it sure provides a LOT of piece of mind, stability and makes Linux a lot better than it used to be with init and friends.
Whether you like Systemd or not, let’s not spread disinformation.
All these things still exist with Systemd. They are just called Systemd dash something. Also, while Systemd is feature rich, it is pretty heavy relative to many alternatives.
Distros that avoid Systemd typically do so because they consider it bloated and possibly insecure.
If you are a fan of Systemd, it is probably because you like the standardization and the integration across previously disparate services. That makes sense. If you think it is making your system faster or lighter, you have not explored the alternatives. Obviously Systemd was a big leap forward in init. Other systems have appeared that also work really well but they are probably too late to matter mainstream. The “market” has spoken and Systemd is the winner.
Although you’re right that’s not that “cut and dry” there’s a lot integrated and baked into the systemd core. Even if you consider a “systemd dash something”, let’s say
systemd-networkdwe’re suddenly talking about a single efficient daemon that covers all networking from basic IPv4 DHCP to IPv6 (with all it’s possible addressing schemes), can act a client or more like a typical router acts, delegate stuff and manage the entire thing from top to bottom in a cohesive way.Just think about the amount of crap you’ve to setup to have a system do dual stack networking and provide prefix delegation on another interface, with systemd it’s just
systemd-networkd. From the basics to serve IP’s, the classicalisc-dhcpcan do both IPv4 and IPv6, however…Or you’ll just find you the implementation is bad and you’ll run
wide-dhcpv6instead. And then you won’t survive withoutradvdfor router advertisements etc.Exactly, systemd solves tons of painful issues and provides a cohesive ecosystem of tools to manage Linux systems. While there are other great alternatives none as are complete and solid as systemd.
But it may. By not having to deal with bunch of poorly integrated tools such as
dhcpcd,dhcpv6,radvd,chrony,NetworkManager,resolvconf,logrotateand others we might actually have less overhead. And I’m not even talking about the time we don’t have to spend making sure all those integrate properly learning 234 different configurations syntaxes and dealing with specific bugs that only happen when program X interacts with program Y with feature Z enabled.I’m not saying system it perfect, because it isn’t but it sure provides a LOT of piece of mind, stability and makes Linux a lot better than it used to be with init and friends.