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. :)

  • SpaceCadet@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year 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
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

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

        • Ghoelian@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

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

        • dmar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

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

          You are blaming it for having proper dependency handling?

          • SpaceCadet@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year 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
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year 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.