"a popular init system"? It's the main init system now. Look at it. Systemd is the captain now.
You'll have to learn it if you use any mainstream distro. Like at work. It is inevitable.
this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2023
584 points (98.0% liked)
linuxmemes
20997 readers
2568 users here now
Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
- LemmyMemes: Memes
- LemmyShitpost: Anything and everything goes.
- RISA: Star Trek memes and shitposts
Community rules
1. Follow the site-wide rules
- Instance-wide TOS: https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
- Lemmy code of conduct: https://join-lemmy.org/docs/code_of_conduct.html
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
sudoin 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!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
It makes my work so much easier than it could've.
Imagine having to tweak sysvinit script at work.
Yeah, nope I'll pass. Unit files for me please thank you.
having to tweak sysvinit script at
Yeah. Trivial. Your point? Are you comparing nfsroot yet?
Nerd!
Yes, that's what 'popular' becomes.
Note that it's often labeled as 'popular' and not 'good'.
I'm sick of redhat's internal junk. It's just to sell courses anyway.
If it was only an init system I'd be ok with it. But it isn't...
You need to use its init system (systemd), its logging system (systemd-journald, and can be forwarded to old school syslog), and some dbus implementation.
If that's an unreasonable requirement for your usecase, check out OpenRC
then what would you define it as?
It's a system daemon that manages way more than an init system, hence the name "systemd".
Everything
... poorly.
Hard question I guess. Middleware maybe?
Popular?
Yes, popular. Many distros use it and, believe it or not, most people don't care it's there. It works.
All the major distros use systemd now.
I knew a Arch guy who called it Sys-dumb-d. He refused to run systemd.
I could mostly care less. It's.....fine. I miss upstart and it's simplicity. Kind of wish it had been actually developed to maturity, but here we are with an init system that also wants to do DNS.
SOYSTEMD LOL 😂😂😂 (i use systemd)
Hell yeah brother
It's never been popular by anybody except RedHat, that's how they sell courses end certifications.
Still haven't found a way to start something after networking has finished when it takes a bit to set everything up. (and no, not going to limit vlans, tunnels,...)
It's a technical 'solution' for a marketing problem.
Wouldn't you just set "networking" as a dependency on the unit of whatever you need started after?
That's what you would do with the init scripts, as that environment waits until the previous one is finished. (ie you know you have working network) Systemd is in a hurry and there 'after' seems to mean 'not before' instead of 'after <specified> is finished', so after networking is started it advances to the next in line.
Yeah. I'm not sure what the issue there is though?
If you're having issues with stuff that's coming up after devices but before getting an IP, you might want to try putting another service as a dependency (dhcp client service maybe).
You may also be falling victim to interface "allow-hotplug" setting. IIRC one of my systems I had to change this in the interfaces configuration to ensure the interface was up fully before other stuff started.
systemctl start service
I love how fucking lennaert subtly changed that. Who cares that it complicates classic tools.
Does After= not fit your use case? I was under the impression it does what you're looking for.
Alas, nop, After= starts a service after networking has started. Somewhere systemd assumes that starting takes x amount of time, which seems to be correct for 1 to a few interfaces, but as soon as you start messing about with vlans, pppoe over 1 vlan and tunnels over pppoe over said vlan (and that's only the outside) that assumption is incorrect.
To link services to a specific interface you need an extra BindsTo=sys-devices-virtual-net-vlan666.device when you want the service to start after vlan666 is actually up. (else it's just started after the depedency is started) Starting vlans/tunnels takes a tad of time, especially when you have 11 vlans, 2 tunnels and a pppoe interface between 1 vlan and the 2 tunnels.
Requires= seems to be for services, BindsTo= for devices.
view more: next ›