|
|
|
|
|
|
by m45t3r
3452 days ago
|
|
|
> Systemd is relatively nice now, but the disdain for it wasn't just 'hate train'. No, it is mostly hate train. I only read one or two solid (technical) arguments against systemd. And no, no one of them is found in the regular systemd-hate sites. > Also, the primary developers have a poor attitude. I think the community have a worse attitude them the core developers, however this is mostly anectodal observation. > eg: goodbye to all your old ways of looking at logs systemd enable syslog.service Here you go, all your old logs in the place you expect them. |
|
|
There's an invisible pink unicorn who knows the winners of every horse race, but only I can see and hear her. Of course, I'm not going to tell you the winners; that's my secret!
Did you get onto the systemd stuff late? I got in midway along and found a few things that were iffy. One of the definite problems was the core developers' disdain for other people's use cases - even Torvalds said he was ambivalent about systemd itself, but the developers were pretty user-hostile and that was a problem.
> Here you go, all your old logs in the place you expect them.
Cool. In the same vein, do we have centralised logging in systemd yet? Or do we still have to run another syslog tool to ship them? Last I looked half a year ago, the consensus was still "ship them through rsyslog/syslog-ng", so you still have to run your old syslog in parallel. Only the IPU knows why they would make a new journaling system for a primarily-server OS, and keep kicking the "centralisation" can down the road.
Yes, the anti-syslog commentary went too far, but there were a lot of problems with it, especially before it had been battle-hardened. But whether or not you do or don't like systemd, you'd be crazy to say that it fits in with that unix principle I mentioned above.