Systemd is incredibly versatile and most people, including myself, are unaware of its full potential. Despite its usefulness, it is often overlooked due to controversy and the current state of things when it comes to software development. Begin today your journey thought Systemd's capabilities and discover how to efficiently manage systems with fewer processes than traditionally used.

After a few conversations with people on Lemmy and other places it became clear to me that most aren’t aware of what it can do and how much more robust it is compared to the usual “jankiness” we’re used to.

In this article I highlight less known features and give out a few practice examples on how to leverage Systemd to remove tons of redundant packages and processes.

And yes, Systemd does containers. :)

  • marmarama@lemmy.world
    689·
    11 months ago

    Do we have to bring this up again? It’s just boring.

    systemd is here and it isn’t going anywhere soon. It’s an improvement over SysV, but the core init system is arguably less well-designed than some of the other options that were on the table 10 years ago when its adoption started. The systemd userspace ecosystem has significantly stifled development of alternatives that provide equivalent functionality, which has led to less experimentation and innovation in those areas. In many cases those systemd add-on services provide less functionality than what they have replaced, but are adopted simply because they are part of the systemd ecosystem. The core unit file format is verbose and somewhat awkward, and the *ctl utilities are messy and sometimes unfriendly.

    Like most Red Hat-originated software written in the last 15 years, it valiantly attempts to solve real problems with Linux, and mostly achieves that, but there are enough corner cases and short-sighted design decisions that it ends up being mediocre and somewhat annoying.

    Personally I hope that someone comes along and takes the lessons learned and rewrites it, much like Pulseaudio has been replaced by Pipewire. Perhaps if someone decides it needs rewriting in Rust?

    • TCB13@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      275·
      11 months ago

      The core unit file format is verbose and somewhat awkward, and the *ctl utilities are messy and sometimes unfriendly.

      While I agree with the rest I don’t particularly believe in this. The unit format is well structured and solves many pitfalls of previous approaches, it also supports configuring a myriad of different things from mounts to sockets and the network in a nice way.

    • SpaceCadet@sopuli.xyzEnglish
      122·
      11 months ago

      Thanks for summarizing my feelings on systemd in a less inflammatory way than if I had written it myself.

      I’ve found that most distributions have implemented it properly and for the most part it works quite well and stays out of my way, it’s only when for some reason you have to dive into the minutiae of a unit file and getting into all the dependencies and stuff that it gets annoying quickly.

      • w2qw@aussie.zone
        42·
        11 months ago

        The dependency system takes a bit to understand but compared to like upstart it was a massive improvement.

          • Ghoelian@feddit.nlEnglish
            131·
            11 months ago

            Or, even worse, A start job is running for ... (10s / no limit)

          • dmar@lemmy.world
            42·
            11 months ago

            I don’t see how exactly that is systemd’s fault.

            You are blaming it for having proper dependency handling?

            • SpaceCadet@sopuli.xyzEnglish
              102·
              11 months ago

              I’m blaming it for making it a pain in the ass to debug dependency problems and for having the confusing, non-intuitive, overly verbose and redundant syntax that probably caused the problem in the first place.

              Like, who the hell can memorize all the subtle differences in behavior between After=, Requires=, Wants=, Requisite=, BindsTo=, PartOf=, UpHolds= and then all their “reverse” equivalents?

              • Laser@feddit.de
                1·
                11 months ago

                You’re right that the difference isn’t overly obvious. However, for most services, Wants= is enough. I think some of these (like Requisite=) came from actual users’ demands where they had to solve corner cases in their setup that systemd did not allow with the existing features. I think especially UpheldBy= is a smart addition; it adds restarting to a service only if that services is used as a dependency for the one it upholds.

    • Oliver Lowe@lemmy.sdf.org
      2·
      11 months ago

      I installed OpenBSD and never looked back. This isn’t an option for everyone but I encourage those who have these kinds of feelings to have a look.