this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
17 points (100.0% liked)

linuxmemes

21378 readers
1262 users here now

Hint: :q!


Sister communities:


Community rules (click to expand)

1. Follow the site-wide rules

2. Be civil
  • Understand the difference between a joke and an insult.
  • Do not harrass or attack members of the community for any reason.
  • Leave remarks of "peasantry" to the PCMR community. If you dislike an OS/service/application, attack the thing you dislike, not the individuals who use it. Some people may not have a choice.
  • Bigotry will not be tolerated.
  • These rules are somewhat loosened when the subject is a public figure. Still, do not attack their person or incite harrassment.
  • 3. Post Linux-related content
  • Including Unix and BSD.
  • Non-Linux content is acceptable as long as it makes a reference to Linux. For example, the poorly made mockery of sudo in Windows.
  • No porn. Even if you watch it on a Linux machine.
  • 4. No recent reposts
  • Everybody uses Arch btw, can't quit Vim, and wants to interject for a moment. You can stop now.
  •  

    Please report posts and comments that break these rules!


    Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.

    founded 1 year ago
    MODERATORS
     
    top 50 comments
    sorted by: hot top controversial new old
    [–] BaroqueInMind@lemmy.one 8 points 7 months ago (4 children)

    Someone please convince me why I should hate systemd because I still don't understand why all the hate exists.

    [–] Lmaydev@programming.dev 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    The idea as far as I can tell is that it's responsible for too many things and gives a massive point of failure.

    [–] rmuk@feddit.uk 8 points 7 months ago (3 children)

    Man, wait until these people hear about the filesystem and kernel.

    [–] ThrowawayPermanente@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    The very existence of a defined kernel is an insult to the Linux philosophy

    [–] psud@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

    The Linux kernel (the part that gives Linux the name) is antithetical to Linux philosophy? I could understand it being contrary to GNU philosophy

    [–] qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website 2 points 7 months ago

    In some ways I think the filesystem is philosophically the exact opposite of systemd


    I can boot my system with an ext4 root, with a btrfs /home...or vice versa. Or add some ZFS, or whatever. The filesystem is (with the exception of some special backup schemes) largely independent of the rest of the system, despite being of core importance.

    On the other hand, I can't change my init system (i.e., systemd) without serious, serious work.

    [–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)
    [–] BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)
    [–] Gork@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

    yes mr stallman

    [–] radiant_bloom@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    Does it ? I thought it was never completed !

    On the other hand, if you want a microkernel that does exist, there’s Mach. But I don’t think you can replace Linux with it 😆

    [–] frezik@midwest.social 2 points 7 months ago

    It's been two years away for the last 30 years.

    [–] psud@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    Yeah, there's a Debian implementation of GNU/hurd. Debian recommend you run it in a VM

    [–] rmuk@feddit.uk 1 points 7 months ago

    I won't bother. Sounds like hurd work.

    [–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    It's also "infectious" software. The way systemd positions itself on the system, it can make it more difficult for software to be written in an agnostic way. This isn't all software, and is often more of a complaint by lower level software, like desktop environments.
    https://catfox.life/2024/01/05/systemd-through-the-eyes-of-a-musl-distribution-maintainer/ This isn't a terrible summary of some of the aspects of it.

    Another aspect is that when it was first developed, the lead on the project was exceptionally hostile to anyone who didn't immediately agree that systemd definitely should take over most of the system, often criticizing people who pointed out bugs or questionable design decisions as being afraid of change or relics of the past.
    It's more of a social reason, but if people feel like the developer of a tool they're forced to use doesn't even respect their concerns, they're going to start rejecting the tool.

    [–] snake_case_lover@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    What do you expect from an init system? It's like saying my cpu is infectious because my computer depends on it

    [–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    It's that it also decided to take over log management, event management, networking, DNS resolution, etc, etc.

    If it were just an init system that would be perfectly portable. People were able to write software that way with sysv for years.

    It's that in order to do certain low level tasks on a systemd system, you need to integrate with systemd, not just "be started by it". Now if a distro wants that piece of software, it needs to use systemd, and other pieces of software that want to be on that distro need to implement integration with systemd.

    A dependency isn't infectious, but a dependency you can't easily swap out is, particularly if it's positioned near the base of a dependency tree.

    Almost all of my software can run on x86 or arm without any issues beyond changing compiler targets. It's closer to how it's tricky to port software between Mac and Linux, or Linux and BSD. Targeting one platform entails significant, potentially prohibitive, effort to support another, despite them all being ostensibly compatible unix like systems.

    [–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    log management, event management, networking, DNS resolution

    and this is a bad thing? the distro can choose to not use it, but because every systemd distro uses it, it's a 1000x easier to implement it without needing to put a fuck tons of if-else's for every distro

    [–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    My understanding is that some people are die hards to the software philosophy of "do one thing really well". systemd at the very least does many different things. These people would prefer to chain a bunch of smaller programs together to replicate the same functionality of systemd since every program in the chain fits the philosophy of "does one thing really well".

    [–] ramble81@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    For me it’s 3 things

    • Do one thing and do it well
    • Everything is a file in Linux
    • human readable logs

    Systemd breaks all three of though by being monolithic and binary. It actually makes you have to jump through more hoops to do things in certain cases. I understand it’s a mindset shift but it really starts making it feel more like Windows with how it works and the registry and event log.

    [–] suzune@ani.social 1 points 7 months ago

    You forgot: use as many dependencies as you need. For example, my init system does not use xz-utils.

    [–] EinfachUnersetzlich@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago

    I don't see how systemd has anything like the Windows registry. At least its journals are leagues ahead of Windows event logs, I hate those things and the awful viewer they have.

    [–] UnityDevice@startrek.website 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    I remember the clusterfuck that existed before systemd, so I love systemd.

    [–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 0 points 7 months ago

    People don’t like it because it’s declarative. It felt cool to be able to just put bash files into certain directories to have them executed on startup. That was elegant, in the sense of “everything’s a file”.

    systemd is more of an api than a framework, so it’s a different design paradigm.

    I hated systemd until I printed out the docs, for some coffee, and sat in a comfy chair to read them front to back. Then I loved it.

    Mostly I hated it because I didn’t know how to do things with it.

    Also, “journalctl” is kind of an ugly command. But really, who gives a fuck. It’s a well-designed system.

    And if a person absolutely must execute their own arbitrary code they can just declare a command to execute their script file as the startup operation on a unit.

    [–] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 6 points 7 months ago (2 children)

    "I am a new linux user. After 15 minutes of research on google, I found a few forum posts and some niche websites that said SystemD was bad, so I took it as gospel. Now my system doesn't work as simply as it did with installer defaults? How do I make everything Just Work™ after removing any OS components I don't understand the need for?"

    [–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (5 children)

    I mean you essentially just highlighted a primary user experience problem with Linux....

    Information & advice is fragmented, spread around, highly opinionated, poorly digestible, out of date, and often dangerous.

    And then the other part of it is that a large part the Linux community will shit on you for not knowing what you don't know because of some weird cultural elitism...

    When you finally ask for help once you realize you don't know what you're doing, you're usually met with derisive comments and criticism instead of help.


    Do you want Linux to be customizable so that users can control it however they want. Or do you want it to be safe so that users don't mess it up? You can't have it both ways, and when you tell users to "go figure it out" and then :suprise_pikachu: that they found the wrong information because they have literally no idea what's good or bad, instead of helping, they get shit on.

    It's the biggest thing holding Linux desktop back.

    [–] 4am@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

    The cultural elitism comes from years of tinkering with their system since all the information they can find is fragmented and spread around, highly opinionated,’poorly digestible, out of date, and often dangerous.

    [–] bitwolf@lemmy.one 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

    To be fair, Windows and Macos support is like this too. Its random forum suggestions from even less technical people.

    The distros official resources are comprehensive and don't have the issue of being outdated and fragmented.

    [–] faerbit@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

    Debians official resources are often outdated, fragmented and not comprehensive in the slightest. I had to scour email list and random blog post if I had to deal with some Debian tooling problems. It's only saving grace, is that it fairly widespread, and that there are these random blog posts.

    [–] K0W4LSK1@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

    This isn't a Linux problem this is a society problem people just want to one up everyone In anyway they can and sometimes I dont think we do it consciencely

    [–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    It turns into a Linux problem when it holds back Linux desktop adoption by creating a difficult or even toxic environment for new, low-technical or non-technical users.

    [–] K0W4LSK1@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    IMO that's not what is holding back Linux from adoption. there are great forums with great people and they happen to be in the distros for beginners. You can use your argument with any small enthusiasts groups and that was my point toxicness is not caused by Linux. I personally believe its windows and Mac forcing themselves on people. Have you ever been to a store to buy a computer and someone said hey would you like to try this free OS that installs and acts just like windows instead of buying windows for 100 bucks? Lol its just marketing.

    [–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

    Not trying to start an argument here but I do want to point out that your argument foundations on blaming other competitors instead of looking at what can make the platform you're passionate about more palatable.

    There are many, MANY, reasons people will choose Mac and windows on their own accord.

    Your argument hand waves that away to make a boogieman out of mac and windows, and erodes the true viability of Linux as a platform by not looking at how it can improve, and instead focusing on how the competition "is bad".

    Taking the ego stance that Linux "would be great if it wasn't being held back by the bad guys" doesn't actually help Linux desktop adoption...

    [–] K0W4LSK1@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

    The problem is linux is palatable there are many distros that are prebuilt to run like a Mac or windows they just have no way of marketing like Microsoft or apple.

    that is because of the Open source licences. If they were able to sell their product do you think linux would be as far behind as it is today?

    If those thousands of companies that use linux every single day had to pay a sub fee instead of measily (tax writeoff)donations do you think think XZ would have been hacked? If they could compete in the capitalist race would they be this far behind? IMO no and the open source license is a blessing and a curse

    I agree both windows and Mac were once great viable OSes now they are just an advertising machine with apps

    linux distros have been held back not by those companies specifically but with how licensing works its really fucked any sort of fulltime development

    a company telling me that my perfectly working hardware is not viable for their new OS and not giving me an option with security updates is a boogieman IMO

    [–] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 7 months ago

    that they found the wrong information because they have literally no idea what's good or bad, instead of helping, they get shit on.

    I don't think anyone's seriously shitting on nooby mistakes, because everyone has done something stupid like that and learned a lesson from it. It's kind of a "cute noob" moment

    [–] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml -1 points 7 months ago

    Debian, Arch, Fedora, Mint, Ubuntu, Redhat, Manjaro all have docs and wiki on their primary websites. Slackware has docs, Gentoo has a wiki. Anything that's not on a distro's site needs to be carefully considered before tampering. Almost all of those distros have a warning in their installation instructions to only listen to the information in their docs and wiki, and to a lesser extent their forums. Hell, even nosystemd.org tells you what systemd is, what it's for, what replacements there are, and the proper way to get rid of it in bold text under the header "How do I get rid of systemd?"

    Listening to hackneyed advice from unvetted sources just because they have strong opinions is a problem that any and every computer will face. That's not a problem with linux anymore than the hoardes of trolls on random social media sites telling you to "delete System32" is a problem with Windows.

    I want Linux to be customizable AND safe. But safe in the way that someone takes the time to learn how what they plan to do will effect their system, not safe in the sense of "impossible to bork"

    As for elitism: if it's "elitist" to indirectly poke fun of someone who deleted a core system component without understanding what it does without a backup, then so be it. It feels more like that word is levied by people whose ego is too big to take respobsibility for the mistakes they made, and instead blame others for laughing when it bites them in the ass.

    Idk where these swaths of elitists that refuse to help are. OOP went to stackexchange and likely got a helpful answer complete with explanations, as that is the community standard. Over on !linux@lemmy.ml , I see people offering help with problems all the time without shitting on them. If I go to the aforementioned OS forums, or really any software-specific forums, I see people helping or pointing people to where they can get help.

    And I'm not denying that assholes who say shit like "did you even bother googling?" exist. They're nasty people with no patience, but they're by no means the community standard unless they're the only ones you pay attention to...

    Or unless you see a screenshot of a question from a different website posted in a meme-sharing forum and expect the comments to offer advice, instead of laughing at the person who shot themselves in the foot and went to a hospital instead of seeking help at the DNC HQ

    [–] Gingernate@programming.dev 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

    Linus tech tips, is that you?

    [–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

    He is less technically inclined

    He read a prompt asking if he wanted to remove his system and said yes

    Then complained about it

    [–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    To be fair it was caused by installing steam. Why System76 didn't test that I don't know.

    [–] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 months ago

    Its partial fault on all sides that added up.

    Ubuntu shipped with that issue for some time and fixed it after some time.

    Pop os iso on the download page contained it.

    The package came from ubuntu but this issue was not visible since up to date pop os does not have this issue. Only the version in iso. So Pop os too made some mistake.

    Linus tried to install steam. The installer does not allow removing necessary packages. He tried to install anyway ignoring all warnings, in cli.

    It says if you are so sure, type "Yes, Do as I say!" with all cases and punctuation correct. Why would you be required to type a very specific phrase to install steam? Its a clear warning for confirmation. He too makes mistake by ignoring all warnings.

    Not to blame anyone but all of them did partial mistake that added up

    [–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    Holly shit this has 700 upvotes

    [–] kamen@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

    Stupidity is entertaining.

    [–] lemmyreader@lemmy.ml 2 points 7 months ago

    I think I would have preferred sudo apt-get remove --purge systemd Yeah, some old habits never die.

    [–] steeznson@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

    You can switch seamlessly between systemd and openrc on gentoo. Although it might be worth using one of the debian derivatives in this user's case - not sure they should be messing with their system too much!

    [–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

    I removed and sold the wheels of my car, now it does not move.

    [–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    He uninstalled systemd, now his computer is not doing systemd things anymore by his retelling. Seems like it worked fine. Yet he asks for a solution of a problem. Maybe he needs to state the problem.

    [–] EvolvedTurtle@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    This is like the Linux equivalent of deleting system32

    [–] SirQuackTheDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

    Nah, more like deleting explorer.exe.

    There's isn't really a Windows equivalent for this, as Windows doesn't give you control on this level.

    It'd be as if you could delete services.msc but also the runner behind it.

    [–] tekeous@usenet.lol 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

    I removed the transmission from my car but now it won’t drive

    [–] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

    That's what you get for transphobia my dude

    [–] sharkfucker420@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

    I just shot my OS in the heart, why isn't it working?