> the Systemd maintainers operated without regards to the community at all
Don't act surprised. Those asshats stomped over a whole lot of shit and everyone acts like they're the savior of the init (and a dozen other) systems.
Don't act surprised. Those asshats stomped over a whole lot of shit and everyone acts like they're the savior of the init (and a dozen other) systems.
I feel like every time I read about something with systemd someone is acting like there is a gun to their head to use it. If your distro of choice _chose_ to use systemd then your beef is with them forcing it on you...not systemd devs. They made an init system - your distro maintainers are the ones who decided it was the superior choice.
Third-party software, particularly from commercial vendors, typically uses Red Hat as the base system requirement.
So you are correct, no-one holds a gun to distro maintainers' heads and forces systemd. They just find that there's no path forward without either [1] committing resources to keep abreast of the changes that systemd is creating both directly and indirectly or [2] just adopting systemd.
Red Hat has won at this point through sheer persistence and clout, so most distros are going with option [2].
Personally I don't see what everyone is so upset about here. As pointed out by message 15, they've simply changed the default behavior and provided a long-opt setting to restore the old behavior if required; the hundreds or thousands of people who don't closely follow systemd will just be inconvenienced temporarily until they figure out wtf is going on, then they are back in business. And, maybe next time they'll pay closer attention.
Anyway I'm sure there will be a systemd-mux soon enough where you can declaratively define your long-running post-logout processes and register them via muxctl or some other existing sd-bus client.
I think most of us agree to this, and I haven't said anything we all don't already know. We just all disagree where that complexity tipping point is, and that's why some of us hate systemd and some of us don't see the problem.
(I'm not saying tmux is bad, I use it all the time. I just don't use it as a daemon manager -- If I understand correctly, they do provide a way to fix screen/tmux.)
Systemd generally tries to standardize how to declare common things about a process:
- should it be automatically restarted if it does? at what interval? - where are its logs? - how to tell if the process is alive or not? - can we isolate the process? (tmp files) - and now: should this process continue to run even if the user has logged out?
And yep, I'm an old schooler who just got tired of dealing with duct tape solutions.
The way we do development where I work is by having two people ssh into a server, and open a joint tmux session. These sessions generally last a week or more, and you generally log out of ssh daily.
Or even if you're not pairing, just being disconnected over lunch is a long enough time for SSH to disconnect. Finding ways to overcome that (besides changing the systemd config) are even more duck tape fixes.
Automatically terminating processes when a user logs out is a bad default. Sure, leave it as an option because there might be some people that would find it useful, but changing the default without a good reason is bad policy.
I've seen people run "nohup [program]" and logout, not even run it in a tmux. If systemd killed their program, I would be quite happy about it.
This actually describes a lot of my problems with Docker as well: I __hate__ that I have to use `docker ps`, etc. This is due to a weakness in traditional UNIX architectures. I ran HURD in a virtual machine a while back and it has the solution to this problem: translators.
I can't wait until they hit a 1.0 release of HURD.
The problem with your sarcasm is that it actually matches current reality. This is how various programs are busily being rearchitected to operate, or indeed already have been rearchitected to operate.
Take gnome-terminal, for example. Nowadays, a gnome-terminal-server service runs under the per-user systemd service manager, and requests to open more terminals generated by the gnome-terminal program arrive at it over the per-user Desktop Bus. gnome-terminal is a Desktop Bus client.
The gnome-terminal-server service used to be Desktop Bus activated, rather than simply run as a per-user systemd service. Ironically, given the headline on this page, this too hit a problem with a systemd release turning things on a while back. systemd version 228, in fact. All of the terminal emulator processes and the shells and login sessions that they spawned ended up sharing a single 512 maximum threads limit.
* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11675129
And yes, gnome-terminal-server too suffered from the kills-screen-and-tmux problem:
* https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/dbus/2015-January/016...
Because that brings to mind a recent project i learned about that plans to stream video via dbus...
* https://github.com/GNOME/gnome-terminal/commit/e1d641726cf0d...