switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: First ... 24 25 26 27 [28]
[#] Tue Oct 04 2016 08:52:37 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Neato! That worked rather well on Ubuntu 16 server.

[#] Tue Oct 04 2016 09:03:23 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Hm, this didn't work on Kali 2.0, though, which also uses systemd. I wonder why that didn't bother it.

[#] Tue Oct 04 2016 09:04:34 EDT from fleeb @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Wait a moment... nope... it looks like it did impact it. I can't restart the box properly. It doesn't seem to mind letting me start/stop services, though.

[#] Wed Oct 05 2016 20:28:24 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: Systemd uber.

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Let me get this straight ... you want me to come up with a way to convince Patrick Volkerding to put systemd into Slackware? That's a pretty tall order.
I don't think it can be done. :)

Slackware isn't really a Linux operating system. It's FreeBSD with a Linux kernel.

That having been said, here are the technical reasons I like systemd. I don't really care to get into the religious war on this one -- in fact, people who dislike systemd are *not* necessarily Hitler. I happen to personally like it because:

* It is a single subsystem that replaces dozens of scripts that can interact in weird ways.
* Installing a new service is simple, and done one way: "systemd enable <svcname>" (assuming you dropped the systemd config in the one proper directory where it is expected to be found).
* systemd does not require specially-formatted comments to be placed in init scripts to give the OS a hint as to ordering and dependencies. Instead, its configuration syntax has proper dependency management.
* Services started by systemd do not require extra code to place themselves into the background (daemonize). Therefore, they don't have to drop pidfiles onto the system so that some other script knows how to shut them down later.
* If a service started by systemd crashes, systemd can respawn it automatically.
Back when sysvinit was ubiquitous, I used to start services directly from /etc/inittab for exactly that reason. systemd offers this ability in a more formal declaration syntax: here's the program; run it in the foreground; if it exits, fire it up again.

sysvinit was designed to be configured by greybeards; systemd was designed to be configured by installation scripts. For that reason alone, it makes more sense for mainstream Linux distributions to be using systemd. Slackware isn't really a mainstream Linux distribution though.
Does it even have the normal init scripts? It's been a long time since I looked at Slackware, but the last time I used it, it had /etc/rc.d style scripts.
Like I said ... FreeBSD with a Linux kernel.

[#] Wed Oct 05 2016 23:47:36 EDT from ax25 @ Uncensored

Subject: Re: Systemd uber.

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

So, automation and daemon management.  Slackware has rc init scripts (BSD).  Never had issues with them, but I mostly use Slackware in cases of set up once and run till it dies cases (one off routers, single board computers with one task, etc...).

I did not mean to invoke a vi vs emacs type holy war.  Just wondering what sysadmin type tasks you found to be helped by using systemd, and what I could do differently with my Slackware installs if they ran it, but for what I do with them, it probably won't help much.

Thanks, I think I see the benefits.  I run systemd at work on a couple of machines so far, and the learning curve has been a fair amount of digging up documentation with each new line in syslog to see what might need tweaking next.  I know it does logging (journalctl), and have started using it as well, but I find it hard not to fall back to reading syslog :-)

Most of the automation I do uses fabric helper scripts to keep my ever growing farm of pets (i.e. not cattle) alive.

Hoping to work in to more automation and cattle servers in the near future though.

[#] Mon Jan 09 2017 15:58:16 EST from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I learned today (and perhaps I'm just a little slow to pick this up) that Linux LVM now has thin provisioning. Not in the block storage layer, but right there in the volume manager. That's pretty cool.

Go to page: First ... 24 25 26 27 [28]