[CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
260 messages Options
12345 ... 13
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On 08.07.2014 14:58, Adrian Sevcenco wrote:

> On 07/08/2014 04:22 AM, Always Learning wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 20:46 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/07/2014 07:47 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>>>> Reading about systemd, it seems it is not well liked and reminiscent of
>>>> Microsoft's "put everything into the Windows Registry" (Win 95 onwards).
>>>>
>>>> Is there a practical alternative to omnipresent, or invasive, systemd ?
>>
>>> So you are following the thread on the Fedora list?  I have been
>>> ignoring it.
>>
>> No. I read some of
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_topic&q=systemd
>>
>> The systemd proponent, advocate and chief developer? wants to
>> abolish /etc and /var in favour of having the /etc and /var data
>> in /usr.
> err.. what? even on that wild fedora thread this did not come up!!!
>
> i will presume that you understood well your information source and you
> are actually know what you are referring to ... so, could you elaborate
> more about this?(with some references)
> i use systemd for some time (and i keep myslef informed about it) and i
> would need to know in time about this kind of change..

There are no plans to "abolish" /etc and /var.

The idea is that rather than say proftpd shipping a default config file
/etc/proftpd.conf that you then have to edit for you needs instead it
will ship the default config somewhere in /usr and let the config in
/etc override the one in /usr. That way if you want to "factory reset"
the system you can basically clear out /etc and you are back do the
defaults. The same applies to /var.
The idea is that /etc and /var become "site-local" directories that only
contain the config you actually changed from the defaults for this system.

Since you already have experience with systemd you are already familiar
with this system where it stores its unit files in /usr/lib/systemd and
if you want to change some of them you copy them to /etc/systemd and
change them there. Same principle.

/etc and /var will stay as valid as ever though and are not being
"abolished".

Regards,
  Dennis
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Steve Clark
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On 07/08/2014 08:09 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:

> On 08.07.2014 13:57, Scott Robbins wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 06:50:21PM -0700, Russell Miller wrote:
>>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 6:34 PM, Scott Robbins<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>> No systemd in FreeBSD.  It isn't Linux, and like any O/S, has its own
>>>> oddities.
>>>>
>>>> It would take more adjustment, IMHO, to go from CentOS 6.x to FreeBSD than
>>>> to go to 7.x.  (I'm saying this as someone who uses both FreeBSD and
>>>> Fedora which has given a hint of what we'll see in CentOS 7.)
>>>>
>>> That's a good point.  Systemd may be the "abomination of desolation" that
>>> causes me to finally start moving to a BSD variant.  Or at least start looking at one.
>> Y'know, I was considered a troll when I said on Fedora forums that systemd
>> going into server systems might start driving people away from RH to the
>> BSDs.  (And to be honest, I was being trollish there, in a friendly way--in
>> the same way at work I'll say something about Arch loudly enough for our
>> Arch lover to hear.)
>>
>> Now that it's insinuated itself in the RHEL system, I do wonder if it is
>> going to start driving people away.  In many ways, IMHO, RH has become the
>> Windows of Linux, with no serious competitors, at least here in the US.
>> Sure, some companies use something else, but when I had to job hunt last
>> year, 90-95 percent of the Linux admin jobs were for RedHat/CentOS/OEL/SL
>> admins.
> That presumes that your conservative attitude is the majority opinion
> though. Systemd is one of the features that I have been looking forward
> to in CentOS 7 because of the new capabilities it provides so while this
> will surely drive some people away it will actually attract others and
> if you think that this will lead to some sort of great exodus then I
> think you are mistaken. Not everybody is this uncomfortable with change.
>
> Regards,
>    Dennis

My concern it that it is a massive change with a large footprint. How secure is it really? It has arguably become
the second kernel it touches and handles so many things.

Maybe on desktops it makes sense - but I fail to see any positives for servers that once started run for months at a time
between reboots.

--
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: [hidden email]
http://www.netwolves.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Adrian Sevcenco
In reply to this post by Adrian Sevcenco
On 07/08/2014 04:06 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:

>
> Am 08.07.2014 14:58, schrieb Adrian Sevcenco:
>> On 07/08/2014 04:22 AM, Always Learning wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 20:46 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/07/2014 07:47 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>>>>> Reading about systemd, it seems it is not well liked and reminiscent of
>>>>> Microsoft's "put everything into the Windows Registry" (Win 95 onwards).
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a practical alternative to omnipresent, or invasive, systemd ?
>>>
>>>> So you are following the thread on the Fedora list?  I have been
>>>> ignoring it.
>>>
>>> No. I read some of
>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_topic&q=systemd
>>>
>>> The systemd proponent, advocate and chief developer? wants to
>>> abolish /etc and /var in favour of having the /etc and /var data
>>> in /usr.
>> err.. what? even on that wild fedora thread this did not come up!!!
>>
>> i will presume that you understood well your information source and you
>> are actually know what you are referring to ... so, could you elaborate
>> more about this?(with some references)
>> i use systemd for some time (and i keep myslef informed about it) and i
>> would need to know in time about this kind of change..
>
> if you need to know about changes the read the systemd-devel list and announcements
> like http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2014-July/020903.html
>
> as so often the OP has no clue what he is talking about
> because he ignores systemd as many other things completly
> while think at the same time he can have a valid opinion
> in details
>
> systemd-upstream discusses how to get /etc and /var in default
> installs empty to contain *only user data* and no default
> configurations which are placed below /usr and can be overriden
> like systemd-units from the user
>
> the deeper reason is to achieve over long that a system can
> boot without any configuration and so provide a clean way
> for "vendor reset" in case of mobile devices, aplliances
> and where ever you want to ship a defined environment which
> can be reset at any point in time
Thanks for info ... actually i am (pretty much) up to date with what is
happening (i don't follow systemd-devel but i am following Lennart
Poettering and Kay Sievers on g+)

My remark was kind of tongue-in-chick with regard to "abolish" word..

And of the OP : the move of defaults to /usr is/was expected as from the
beginning the usr consolidation was prepared in order to have a common
system shared over network

And about new mechanics of systemd: i can wait to see how seamless will
be the use of chef/puppet tools on systemd systems. (and on any other
cloud stacks)

Adrian


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On 08.07.2014 15:22, Steve Clark wrote:

> On 07/08/2014 08:09 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>> On 08.07.2014 13:57, Scott Robbins wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 06:50:21PM -0700, Russell Miller wrote:
>>>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 6:34 PM, Scott Robbins<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>>> No systemd in FreeBSD.  It isn't Linux, and like any O/S, has its own
>>>>> oddities.
>>>>>
>>>>> It would take more adjustment, IMHO, to go from CentOS 6.x to
>>>>> FreeBSD than
>>>>> to go to 7.x.  (I'm saying this as someone who uses both FreeBSD and
>>>>> Fedora which has given a hint of what we'll see in CentOS 7.)
>>>>>
>>>> That's a good point.  Systemd may be the "abomination of desolation"
>>>> that
>>>> causes me to finally start moving to a BSD variant.  Or at least
>>>> start looking at one.
>>> Y'know, I was considered a troll when I said on Fedora forums that
>>> systemd
>>> going into server systems might start driving people away from RH to the
>>> BSDs.  (And to be honest, I was being trollish there, in a friendly
>>> way--in
>>> the same way at work I'll say something about Arch loudly enough for our
>>> Arch lover to hear.)
>>>
>>> Now that it's insinuated itself in the RHEL system, I do wonder if it is
>>> going to start driving people away.  In many ways, IMHO, RH has
>>> become the
>>> Windows of Linux, with no serious competitors, at least here in the US.
>>> Sure, some companies use something else, but when I had to job hunt last
>>> year, 90-95 percent of the Linux admin jobs were for
>>> RedHat/CentOS/OEL/SL
>>> admins.
>> That presumes that your conservative attitude is the majority opinion
>> though. Systemd is one of the features that I have been looking forward
>> to in CentOS 7 because of the new capabilities it provides so while this
>> will surely drive some people away it will actually attract others and
>> if you think that this will lead to some sort of great exodus then I
>> think you are mistaken. Not everybody is this uncomfortable with change.
>>
>> Regards,
>>    Dennis
>
> My concern it that it is a massive change with a large footprint. How
> secure is it really? It has arguably become
> the second kernel it touches and handles so many things.

I agree but that is a change that you actively have to opt into though.
CentOS 6 will receive updates for many years to come so you don't have
to immediately migrate everything over in a rush. Also systemd is hardly
new at this point. It has been available for years and had quite some
time to mature. Red Hat would not have made it the core of its
"Enterprise" OS if it didn't think it would be very reliable.

> Maybe on desktops it makes sense - but I fail to see any positives for
> servers that once started run for months at a time
> between reboots.

The ability to jail services and restrict it's resources is one big plus
for me. Also the switch from messy bash scripts to a declarative
configuration makes things easier once you get used to the syntax.
Then there is the fact that services are actually monitored and can be
restarted automatically if they fail/crash and they run in a sane
environment where stdout is redirected into the journal so that all
output is caught which can be useful for debugging.

Its certainly a change one needs to get used to but as mentioned above I
don't think its a bad change and you don't have to jump to it
immediately if you don't want to.

Regards,
  Dennis

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Ned Slider
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On 08/07/14 14:14, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:

> On 08.07.2014 14:58, Adrian Sevcenco wrote:
>> On 07/08/2014 04:22 AM, Always Learning wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2014-07-07 at 20:46 -0400, Robert Moskowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 07/07/2014 07:47 PM, Always Learning wrote:
>>>>> Reading about systemd, it seems it is not well liked and reminiscent of
>>>>> Microsoft's "put everything into the Windows Registry" (Win 95 onwards).
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there a practical alternative to omnipresent, or invasive, systemd ?
>>>
>>>> So you are following the thread on the Fedora list?  I have been
>>>> ignoring it.
>>>
>>> No. I read some of
>>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_topic&q=systemd
>>>
>>> The systemd proponent, advocate and chief developer? wants to
>>> abolish /etc and /var in favour of having the /etc and /var data
>>> in /usr.
>> err.. what? even on that wild fedora thread this did not come up!!!
>>
>> i will presume that you understood well your information source and you
>> are actually know what you are referring to ... so, could you elaborate
>> more about this?(with some references)
>> i use systemd for some time (and i keep myslef informed about it) and i
>> would need to know in time about this kind of change..
>
> There are no plans to "abolish" /etc and /var.
>
> The idea is that rather than say proftpd shipping a default config file
> /etc/proftpd.conf that you then have to edit for you needs instead it
> will ship the default config somewhere in /usr and let the config in
> /etc override the one in /usr. That way if you want to "factory reset"
> the system you can basically clear out /etc and you are back do the
> defaults. The same applies to /var.
> The idea is that /etc and /var become "site-local" directories that only
> contain the config you actually changed from the defaults for this system.
>
> Since you already have experience with systemd you are already familiar
> with this system where it stores its unit files in /usr/lib/systemd and
> if you want to change some of them you copy them to /etc/systemd and
> change them there. Same principle.
>
> /etc and /var will stay as valid as ever though and are not being
> "abolished".
>

That's not always true.

Some configs that were under /etc on el6 must now reside under /usr on el7.

Take modprobe blacklists for example.

On el5 and el6 they are in /etc/modprobe.d/

On el7 they need to be in /usr/lib/modprobe.d/

If you install modprobe blacklists to the old location under el7 they
will not work.

I'm sure there are other examples, this is just one example I've
happened to run into.


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Johnny Hughes
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On 07/08/2014 08:42 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:

> On 08.07.2014 15:22, Steve Clark wrote:
>> On 07/08/2014 08:09 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>>> On 08.07.2014 13:57, Scott Robbins wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 06:50:21PM -0700, Russell Miller wrote:
>>>>> On Jul 7, 2014, at 6:34 PM, Scott Robbins<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>>>>> No systemd in FreeBSD.  It isn't Linux, and like any O/S, has its own
>>>>>> oddities.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would take more adjustment, IMHO, to go from CentOS 6.x to
>>>>>> FreeBSD than
>>>>>> to go to 7.x.  (I'm saying this as someone who uses both FreeBSD and
>>>>>> Fedora which has given a hint of what we'll see in CentOS 7.)
>>>>>>
>>>>> That's a good point.  Systemd may be the "abomination of desolation"
>>>>> that
>>>>> causes me to finally start moving to a BSD variant.  Or at least
>>>>> start looking at one.
>>>> Y'know, I was considered a troll when I said on Fedora forums that
>>>> systemd
>>>> going into server systems might start driving people away from RH to the
>>>> BSDs.  (And to be honest, I was being trollish there, in a friendly
>>>> way--in
>>>> the same way at work I'll say something about Arch loudly enough for our
>>>> Arch lover to hear.)
>>>>
>>>> Now that it's insinuated itself in the RHEL system, I do wonder if it is
>>>> going to start driving people away.  In many ways, IMHO, RH has
>>>> become the
>>>> Windows of Linux, with no serious competitors, at least here in the US.
>>>> Sure, some companies use something else, but when I had to job hunt last
>>>> year, 90-95 percent of the Linux admin jobs were for
>>>> RedHat/CentOS/OEL/SL
>>>> admins.
>>> That presumes that your conservative attitude is the majority opinion
>>> though. Systemd is one of the features that I have been looking forward
>>> to in CentOS 7 because of the new capabilities it provides so while this
>>> will surely drive some people away it will actually attract others and
>>> if you think that this will lead to some sort of great exodus then I
>>> think you are mistaken. Not everybody is this uncomfortable with change.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>    Dennis
>> My concern it that it is a massive change with a large footprint. How
>> secure is it really? It has arguably become
>> the second kernel it touches and handles so many things.
> I agree but that is a change that you actively have to opt into though.
> CentOS 6 will receive updates for many years to come so you don't have
> to immediately migrate everything over in a rush. Also systemd is hardly
> new at this point. It has been available for years and had quite some
> time to mature. Red Hat would not have made it the core of its
> "Enterprise" OS if it didn't think it would be very reliable.
>
>> Maybe on desktops it makes sense - but I fail to see any positives for
>> servers that once started run for months at a time
>> between reboots.
> The ability to jail services and restrict it's resources is one big plus
> for me. Also the switch from messy bash scripts to a declarative
> configuration makes things easier once you get used to the syntax.
> Then there is the fact that services are actually monitored and can be
> restarted automatically if they fail/crash and they run in a sane
> environment where stdout is redirected into the journal so that all
> output is caught which can be useful for debugging.
And this is indeed the crux of the matter ... systemd is NOT just about
booting or boot up time (combing posts here .. but this is the answer
to, why use this on a server where fast booting is not important).

>
> Its certainly a change one needs to get used to but as mentioned above I
> don't think its a bad change and you don't have to jump to it
> immediately if you don't want to.

And this too .. try it, see if it meets your needs, if it doesn't you
still have 6.5 years with CentOS-6.5 support until you have to move.


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

mark-3
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
> On 08.07.2014 14:35, David Both wrote:
>> I still prefer IPTables, so in Fedora I simply disabled firewalld and
>> enabled IPTables. No need to uninstall. I have read that IPTables will
>> continue to be available alongside firewalld for the unspecified future.
<nsip>
>> One of the stated reasons for firewalld is that dynamic rule changes do
>> not clear the old rules before loading the new ones, to paraphrase, "where
>> IPTables does." If true, that would leave a very small amount of time
in which
>> the host would be vulnerable. I have no desire to peruse the source
code to
>> determine the veracity of that statement, so if there is someone here
who could verify that
>> changing the rules in IPTables, whether using the iptables command or
>> the iptables-restore command, I would be very appreciative. No need to
go to
>> any trouble to locate that answer as I am merely curious.
<snip>

> The problem firewalld tries to solve is that nowadays you often want to
> insert temporary rules that should only be active while a certain
> application is running. This collides a bit with the way iptables works.
> For example libvirt inserts specific rules when you define networks for
> virtualization dynamically. If you now do an iptables-save these rules
> get saved and on next boot when these rules are restored the exist again
> but now libvirt will add them dynamically a second time.
>
> Firewalld is simply a framework built around iptables that allows for
> applications to "register" rules with additional information such as
<snip>
And so nothing like, say, fail2ban....

       mark


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

mark-3
In reply to this post by Scott Robbins
Scott Robbins wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2014 at 02:09:49PM +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>> On 08.07.2014 13:57, Scott Robbins wrote:

>> > Now that it's insinuated itself in the RHEL system, I do wonder if it
>> is going to start driving people away.  In many ways, IMHO, RH has become
>> the Windows of Linux, with no serious competitors, at least here in the
>> US. Sure, some companies use something else, but when I had to job hunt
>> last year, 90-95 percent of the Linux admin jobs were for
>> RedHat/CentOS/OEL/SL admins.
>>
>> That presumes that your conservative attitude is the majority opinion
>> though.
>
> Very true. I do remember Adam Williamson of Fedora commenting on their
> forums that he pictured many of the complainers about various changes,
> including systemd, to be old white guys, which fit me to a T.
<snip>
So he's guilty of ageism, as well as aggressively NIH (Not Invented Here),
and a faddist.... Did he actually have any *good*, persuasive reasons for
such changes?

       mark


_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Russell Miller
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn

On Jul 8, 2014, at 5:09 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> That presumes that your conservative attitude is the majority opinion
> though. Systemd is one of the features that I have been looking forward
> to in CentOS 7 because of the new capabilities it provides so while this
> will surely drive some people away it will actually attract others and
> if you think that this will lead to some sort of great exodus then I
> think you are mistaken. Not everybody is this uncomfortable with change.
>
For the record, I'm not uncomfortable with change.  I'm uncomfortable with stupid,
poorly thought out, monolithic change that ignores half a century of the UNIX philosophy.
And creating a daemon that tries to handle everything but the kitchen sink and implementing
it in such a way as to make it nearly incomprehensible to me certainly qualifies
as that type of change.

Sysvinit may not be perfect, but it's UNIX.  Systemd is...  a lot of things, but more
of a windows-like solution than I"m comfortable with.  It's just dumb.  Surely there could
have been a better way of accomplishing their goals without creating the equivalent of
Cartman's Trapper Keeper.

And yea, I'm kind of an old white guy (is 38 old?)  The guy who called that out as
a negative is not helping his cause with me.  This old white guy has been doing Linux
administration when some people on this list were pulling the hair of girls they liked
and eating bugs.

(and if that was yesterday, I don't want to hear about it. :))

--Russell

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Steve Clark
On 07/08/2014 10:49 AM, Russell Miller wrote:

> On Jul 8, 2014, at 5:09 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> That presumes that your conservative attitude is the majority opinion
>> though. Systemd is one of the features that I have been looking forward
>> to in CentOS 7 because of the new capabilities it provides so while this
>> will surely drive some people away it will actually attract others and
>> if you think that this will lead to some sort of great exodus then I
>> think you are mistaken. Not everybody is this uncomfortable with change.
>>
> For the record, I'm not uncomfortable with change.  I'm uncomfortable with stupid,
> poorly thought out, monolithic change that ignores half a century of the UNIX philosophy.
> And creating a daemon that tries to handle everything but the kitchen sink and implementing
> it in such a way as to make it nearly incomprehensible to me certainly qualifies
> as that type of change.
>
> Sysvinit may not be perfect, but it's UNIX.  Systemd is...  a lot of things, but more
> of a windows-like solution than I"m comfortable with.  It's just dumb.  Surely there could
> have been a better way of accomplishing their goals without creating the equivalent of
> Cartman's Trapper Keeper.
>
> And yea, I'm kind of an old white guy (is 38 old?)  The guy who called that out as
> a negative is not helping his cause with me.  This old white guy has been doing Linux
> administration when some people on this list were pulling the hair of girls they liked
> and eating bugs.
>
> (and if that was yesterday, I don't want to hear about it. :))
>
> --Russell
Couldn't have said it better.

--
Stephen Clark
*NetWolves Managed Services, LLC.*
Director of Technology
Phone: 813-579-3200
Fax: 813-882-0209
Email: [hidden email]
http://www.netwolves.com
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Tony Schreiner-2
In reply to this post by Russell Miller
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Russell Miller <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> On Jul 8, 2014, at 5:09 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > That presumes that your conservative attitude is the majority opinion
> > though. Systemd is one of the features that I have been looking forward
> > to in CentOS 7 because of the new capabilities it provides so while this
> > will surely drive some people away it will actually attract others and
> > if you think that this will lead to some sort of great exodus then I
> > think you are mistaken. Not everybody is this uncomfortable with change.
> >
> For the record, I'm not uncomfortable with change.  I'm uncomfortable with
> stupid,
> poorly thought out, monolithic change that ignores half a century of the
> UNIX philosophy.
> And creating a daemon that tries to handle everything but the kitchen sink
> and implementing
> it in such a way as to make it nearly incomprehensible to me certainly
> qualifies
> as that type of change.
>
> Sysvinit may not be perfect, but it's UNIX.  Systemd is...  a lot of
> things, but more
> of a windows-like solution than I"m comfortable with.  It's just dumb.
>  Surely there could
> have been a better way of accomplishing their goals without creating the
> equivalent of
> Cartman's Trapper Keeper.
>
> And yea, I'm kind of an old white guy (is 38 old?)  The guy who called
> that out as
> a negative is not helping his cause with me.  This old white guy has been
> doing Linux
> administration when some people on this list were pulling the hair of
> girls they liked
> and eating bugs.
>
> (and if that was yesterday, I don't want to hear about it. :))
>
> --Russell
>
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>


What's Windows-ish about it? It's all text files; easily available to look
at.
And Solaris with SMF went in this direction many years ago.

Tony Schreiner
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Russell Miller
In reply to this post by Russell Miller

On Jul 8, 2014, at 7:58 AM, Reindl Harald <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> and the next one talking before try to get informations
> there is no monolithic daemon damned
>
> there is one project with one source tree maintaining
> a lot of daemons and binaries - so be quite before
> you tried to learn some basics

Generally when people get personal I figure I must have hit a nerve.

I must have hit a nerve.

I didn't say it was windows-like.  I said it was more windows-like than I was
comfortable with.   Even with multiple daemons, It's still not very transparent,
somewhat incomrehensible, documented poorly while still managing to have
voluminous documentation, dumps stuff everywhere, and is just generally
annoying.

Even its sysv compatibility is incomplete.  It runs sysv scripts, but in such a
way as to break any but the simplest.  I've run into situations where I've actually
had to make a systemd unit because it broke the script, and I couldn't fix it.  The
script was fine, ran perfectly if you just ran it, and systemd did... *something*...
to it.  I still haven't figured out what.  And debugging is an absolute pain.

And that's all I'm saying in response to you.  Keep this up
and my killfile will have one more entry.

--Russell
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Oliver Schad
On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 08:05:07 -0700
Russell Miller <[hidden email]> wrote:


> Generally when people get personal I figure I must have hit a nerve.
>
> I must have hit a nerve.
>
> I didn't say it was windows-like.  I said it was more windows-like
> than I was comfortable with.   Even with multiple daemons, It's still
> not very transparent, somewhat incomrehensible, documented poorly
> while still managing to have voluminous documentation, dumps stuff
> everywhere, and is just generally annoying.
>
> Even its sysv compatibility is incomplete.  It runs sysv scripts, but
> in such a way as to break any but the simplest.  I've run into
> situations where I've actually had to make a systemd unit because it
> broke the script, and I couldn't fix it.  The script was fine, ran
> perfectly if you just ran it, and systemd did... *something*... to
> it.  I still haven't figured out what.  And debugging is an absolute
> pain.
>
> And that's all I'm saying in response to you.  Keep this up
> and my killfile will have one more entry.
We don't care in facts. We just believe. So if you don't believe in
systemd and Poettering, go away. We make religion, not technology.

Best Regards
Oli

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

mark-3
Oliver Schad wrote:

> On Tue, 8 Jul 2014 08:05:07 -0700
> Russell Miller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>> Generally when people get personal I figure I must have hit a nerve.
>>
>> I must have hit a nerve.
>>
>> I didn't say it was windows-like.  I said it was more windows-like
>> than I was comfortable with.   Even with multiple daemons, It's still
>> not very transparent, somewhat incomrehensible, documented poorly
>> while still managing to have voluminous documentation, dumps stuff
>> everywhere, and is just generally annoying.
>>
>> Even its sysv compatibility is incomplete.  It runs sysv scripts, but
>> in such a way as to break any but the simplest.  I've run into
>> situations where I've actually had to make a systemd unit because it
>> broke the script, and I couldn't fix it.  The script was fine, ran
>> perfectly if you just ran it, and systemd did... *something*... to
>> it.  I still haven't figured out what.  And debugging is an absolute
>> pain.
>>
>> And that's all I'm saying in response to you.  Keep this up
>> and my killfile will have one more entry.
>
> We don't care in facts. We just believe. So if you don't believe in
> systemd and Poettering, go away. We make religion, not technology.

Right. Can we get him to stop Peottering around in our gardens, and go
play in one that does not affect so many people negatively?

     mark

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Oliver Schad
In reply to this post by Johnny Hughes
On Tue, 08 Jul 2014 09:04:59 -0500
Johnny Hughes <[hidden email]> wrote:

> And this is indeed the crux of the matter ... systemd is NOT just
> about booting or boot up time (combing posts here .. but this is the
> answer to, why use this on a server where fast booting is not
> important).  

Systemd is emacs for booting without extension capabilities - so at
least with no clue.

The whole idea is to put stuff into a DSL which can't be formulated
with a not turing complete language. To build something, which has nice
shortcuts for many things: fine. But that has nothing to do with
systemd.

What you could build is a event system with nice hooks to place your
code. And you could use that for many things, when it's damn simple and
fast.

But systemd is everything but not stupid simple. It's only stupid.

Best Regards
Oli

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos

signature.asc (205 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Veli-Pekka Kestilä
In reply to this post by mark-3
On 8.7.2014 17:25, [hidden email] wrote:

> Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:
>> The problem firewalld tries to solve is that nowadays you often want to
>> insert temporary rules that should only be active while a certain
>> application is running. This collides a bit with the way iptables works.
>> For example libvirt inserts specific rules when you define networks for
>> virtualization dynamically. If you now do an iptables-save these rules
>> get saved and on next boot when these rules are restored the exist again
>> but now libvirt will add them dynamically a second time.
>>
>> Firewalld is simply a framework built around iptables that allows for
>> applications to "register" rules with additional information such as
> And so nothing like, say, fail2ban....
I haven't looked closely on firewalld yet, but in practice it should
probably allow making fail2ban functionality more robust and fail2ban
like functionality simpler to implement. Especially as I distinctly
remember of complaining of problems with fail2ban from Fedora list.
(Granted have has very little time lately to read any mailing lists)

-vpk

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Always Learning-3
In reply to this post by Adrian Sevcenco

On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 15:58 +0300, Adrian Sevcenco wrote:

> On 07/08/2014 04:22 AM, Always Learning wrote:
> >
> > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_topic&q=systemd
> >
> > The systemd proponent, advocate and chief developer? wants to
> > abolish /etc and /var in favour of having the /etc and /var data
> > in /usr.

> err.. what? even on that wild fedora thread this did not come up!!!

Please see the link above. I used it to find the 'stateless' item, and
after selecting it clicked on

http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/stateless.html




--
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.

   Centos, Exim, Apache, Libre Office.
   Linux is the future. Micro$oft is the past.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Always Learning-3
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn

On Tue, 2014-07-08 at 15:14 +0200, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn wrote:

> There are no plans to "abolish" /etc and /var.
>
> The idea is that rather than say proftpd shipping a default config file
> /etc/proftpd.conf that you then have to edit for you needs instead it
> will ship the default config somewhere in /usr and let the config in
> /etc override the one in /usr.

Exactly the same as Logwatch does now in C5 and C6.


--
Regards,

Paul.
England, EU.

   Centos, Exim, Apache, Libre Office.
   Linux is the future. Micro$oft is the past.

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Lamar Owen
In reply to this post by Always Learning-3
On 07/08/2014 11:37 AM, Always Learning wrote:
> Please see the link above. I used it to find the 'stateless' item, and
> after selecting it clicked on
>
> http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/stateless.html
There are many use cases involving servers where such a capability would
be highly desirable.  Most are cloud-oriented, where you want to spin up
an instance rapidly (to deal with increased load, perhaps) and then spin
it down, and having dynamically loaded /etc and /var content allows this
in a smooth manner.  Static servers have their uses, of course, but at
least in my data center I find actual server load to be very dynamic,
but power load to be rather static; why *shouldn't* the power used be
proportional to the work load?

The real promise of 'cloud' technology is for us in in-house servers
that can spin up only when needed, saving power and cooling costs in the
process.  Stateless is not the only way to go, of course, and nothing in
the blog post to which you link is 'never again honor anything in /etc
and /var' to be found, but rather, much like /etc serves as a fall-back
for many programs who look first in a dot-file in ~, the content in /usr
serves as an OS-default fallback to the per-system (or per-instance)
configuration and state in /etc and /var.

It is a different way of looking at things, for sure, but I can
definitely see a server use-case for this sort of thing, especially
since there is significant budget pressure to reduce power costs.

And dynamic spinup of servers to handle increased load is a use case for
systemd's rapid bootup.  They go hand-in-hand.

The Unix philosophy unfortunately sometimes misses the forest for all of
the trees.   Sometimes tools need to actually be designed to work
together, and sometimes a Swiss Army Knife is the right thing to have.

(And I'm an old Unix hack, too, having used Unix of several flavors
since before Linux was even a gleam in Linus' eyes).

_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [CentOS] Cemtos 7 : Systemd alternatives ?

Les Mikesell
In reply to this post by Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Also the switch from messy bash scripts to a declarative
> configuration makes things easier once you get used to the syntax.

Sorry, but I'd recommend that anyone who thinks shell syntax is
'messy' just stay away from unix-like systems instead of destroying
the best parts of them.   There is a huge advantage of consistent
behavior whether some command is executed interactively on the command
line or started automatically by some other means.

> Then there is the fact that services are actually monitored and can be
> restarted automatically if they fail/crash and they run in a sane
> environment where stdout is redirected into the journal so that all
> output is caught which can be useful for debugging.

What part of i/o redirection does the shell not handle well for you?

> Its certainly a change one needs to get used to but as mentioned above I
> don't think its a bad change and you don't have to jump to it
> immediately if you don't want to.

'Immediately' has different meanings to different people.  I'd rather
see such things discussed in terms of cost of re-implementations.  How
much is this going to cost a typical company _just_ to keep their
existing programs working the same way over the next decade (which is
a relatively short time in terms of business-process changes)?   Even
if the changes themselves are minor, you have to cover the cost of
paying some number of people for that 'get used to the syntax' step.
Personally I think Red Hat did everyone a disservice by splitting the
development side off to fedora and divorcing it from the enterprise
users that like the consistency.

--
   Les Mikesell
     [hidden email]
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
12345 ... 13