Gregory's ServerDue to the extremely large number of basic functions "systemd" has usurped from other parts of the OS, a natural and interesting project would be to see if systemd can now exist independently apart from Linux, or rather, to ascertain what is the most minimal alternate kernel that could serve as a life support system for successfully running systemd. Since calling this "System System" would be absurd, the most logical name for such a project would be "d OS", or "DOS". In this Mastodon post I will
 78 comments
   @DrHyde @SetOfAllSets @gkrnours You know no one has at any point yet given me a reason to dislike systemd except "it is not old thing" and I didn't actually like old thing. I guess I kind of liked Upstart but certainly not the weird script mess that predated it. Whatever that was called. Boot.d or something @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours I dislike systemd because it eats everything and turns it into a part of itself, it's like the polar opposite of KISS. Edit: and I do like how it starts services in parallel, I'm doing something similar with my package manager for example, it's a good idea, it just comes with the baggage of systemd being systemd. @SetOfAllSets @mcc @gkrnours starting things in parallel is a neat trick, but not terribly useful unless you're spawning VMs all the time - and if you are flinging VMs around like confetti you probably won't be running much on each machine so surely the benefit mostly goes away. @SetOfAllSets @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours it seems all good ideas eventually accumulate baggage. @bassplayer @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours the good idea isn't the baggage for me, it's the over expansion into areas unrelated to the init system @SetOfAllSets @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours I don't think I said that. I only meant that things start out very lean and specific and end up up having so much added to them and the new thing is developed which is specific and efficient and the process seems to start all over. Also would you not call the new OS linuxctl since every command has ctl appended to it. :D @bassplayer @mcc @DrHyde @gkrnours ah ok, I misunderstood, also the OS would be unix-like (except when it's not)  @mcc @DrHyde @SetOfAllSets @gkrnours personally I've had systemd brick computers because grub failed to update and systemd mounts EFIVARS as r/w When DW run an a poll on init systems a few years ago, OpenRC, Runit, & s6 took 66% of the vote. Most industrial marketing rags will have you believe otherwise, that people like what they push down our throats.    @mcc my coworkers and I joked about systemd doing exactly this I think we're also half serious it will   @mcc This might not be so easy. Systemd assumes that it has a lot of functionality available from the kernel (related to the various kinds of containers, process groups and namespaces) that aren't present in the various BSDs, so when Gnome became increasingly dependent on systemd this presented portability problems. Your proposed project (I know, not intended seriously) probably couldn't drop that much from Linux.  @not2b @mcc There are some Linux-specific system calls that systemd is unlikely to have much use for. And you wouldn't need all of the driver and architecture code in the kernel depending on what exactly your goal is. And that's a big part of the kernel. Etc. But yeah. I think the systemd project generally has the philosophy of taking advantage of what Linux offers and not caring about POSIX/BSD. Lennart Poettering at least has explicitly argued developers should ignore BSD/POSIX.   @mcc I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, systemd/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, systemd plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning systemd system made useful by the systemd corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by @pid_eins  @danirabbit@mastodon.online @mcc@mastodon.social @pid_eins@mastodon.social i actually like systemd because my issue tracker isn't flooded by pro systemd weenies when i add an openrc init script shim complaining that i dont support init freedom.    @mcc and here I am making sure all my systems run the minimum systemd I can get away with. Today, it might include re-enabling a proper TEXT syslog. It definitely includes using competent software for the "resolved" and "timesyncd" components. @mcc   i've been waiting for the day i see "systemctl start vmlinuz" as the inevitable conclusion of the systemd over-reach.  @tithonium I'm good without systemd for now. i figure by the time slackware has to move init systems, something better will be along. (Like pipewire. I don't use pulse anymore, and honestly kept it off for 90% of what I used a computer for. ALSA/jack for me.)   @mcc tl;dr: the metamorphosis of GNU/Linux to Systemd/Linux is nearly complete. Thanks, I hate it. Give me SysV init or give me death.  UPDATE: I have been thinking about this and concluded both the name "DOS" and its most logical alternate form, "DDOS" (D Disk Operating System) have problems. Therefore I propose that this project, were it to be exist, be named "Linuxn't", which since apostrophes aren't great in program names would most logically be stylized as "Linux NT"   @mcc Iโm waiting for a version aimed more toward home users rather than tech people. Something personal that represents how an individual would use an operating system. Something that is all about ME.   @mcc Since neither the kernel, nor systemd would be useful without the other, I think itโs fair to say theyโre both half of an operating system. Therefore it should be called OS/2  @mcc  |
@mcc I canโt wait for kerneld to replace Linux! *sarcasm*