You are not logged in.

#1 2012-07-14 22:15:40

thoho180192
Member
Registered: 2012-05-08
Posts: 57

SystemD ugly boot

Why does systemD have to be so ugly when booting? The SysVinit which is beeing used by Archlinux today have fancy colors and done text. It looks clean and neat.

Is it possible to get it to look better?

Last edited by thoho180192 (2012-07-14 22:16:14)

Offline

#2 2012-07-14 22:58:50

tomegun
Developer
From: France
Registered: 2010-05-28
Posts: 661

Re: SystemD ugly boot

I guess it depends on your taste. But systemd boot looks fine for me. Colors indicating OK/FAILED/... and messages about what is / has been started.

Without more information it is not easy to tell if you have encountered a bug or not....

Offline

#3 2012-07-14 23:01:22

thoho180192
Member
Registered: 2012-05-08
Posts: 57

Re: SystemD ugly boot

I havent switched yet. I've just been watching a few youtube movies with Archlinux and sysD and it dosnt look as good as the current init system.

I think Im going to install and see for myself though.

Thanks for reply.

Offline

#4 2012-07-15 00:00:08

ataraxia
Member
From: Pittsburgh
Registered: 2007-05-06
Posts: 1,537

Re: SystemD ugly boot

By default, the systemd boot doesn't say anything. I see the bootloader text, and then one line of output from fsck preening the root filesystem, and then the screen clears and the getty login prompt appears. It's possible to get detailed status output from systemd during the boot (see systemd's homepage for a Fedora-based example of this), but it's not enabled by default.

Offline

#5 2012-07-15 00:59:35

thoho180192
Member
Registered: 2012-05-08
Posts: 57

Re: SystemD ugly boot

I've installed systemD now and it actually both look and work great. I have one problem thou. I cant enable networkmanager and the gdm service.
It gives me a error message reading "Failed to issue method call: No such file or directory"

Wiki says it should work so I dont know.

Do I need the archlinux units package? I thought that were to get old configs to work.

Offline

#6 2012-07-15 08:22:39

Rasi
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2007-08-14
Posts: 1,844
Website

Re: SystemD ugly boot

thoho180192 wrote:

I cant enable networkmanager and the gdm service.
It gives me a error message reading "Failed to issue method call: No such file or directory".


you need to add ".service" - also networkmanager.service doesnt exist, its called NetworkManager.service

so you do:

systemctl enable NetworkManager.service
systemctl enable gdm.service

Last edited by Rasi (2012-07-15 08:23:22)


He hoped and prayed that there wasn't an afterlife. Then he realized there was a contradiction involved here and merely hoped that there wasn't an afterlife.

Douglas Adams

Offline

#7 2012-07-15 08:34:19

65kid
Member
From: Germany
Registered: 2011-01-26
Posts: 663

Re: SystemD ugly boot

gdm.service is part of systemd-arch-units

Offline

#8 2012-07-15 12:30:01

thoho180192
Member
Registered: 2012-05-08
Posts: 57

Re: SystemD ugly boot

Thanks wink

It was an easy switch. Im running systemD without sysvinit and its much faster then it used to be wink
Thanks for the help wink

Offline

#9 2012-07-15 13:35:05

ANOKNUSA
Member
Registered: 2010-10-22
Posts: 2,141

Re: SystemD ugly boot

thoho180192 wrote:

I havent switched yet. I've just been watching a few youtube movies with Archlinux and sysD and it dosnt look as good as the current init system.

I think Im going to install and see for myself though.

Thanks for reply.

So... this is solved, or what?  Was there ever any real problem?

I'm being rhetorical.  Half-baked film criticism is the sort of stuff blogs are made for.  Really, how long do you need to look at boot info before a login prompt?  If it's really a problem for you, use a splash screen.

Offline

#10 2012-07-15 13:43:15

thoho180192
Member
Registered: 2012-05-08
Posts: 57

Re: SystemD ugly boot

Good point wink

I've tried some splash screens in the past. Never got satisfied. Nothing compares to the beautiful Arch SysV boot, but ofcourse this systemD thing is extremly fast compared to the old one. I think I can manage.

Offline

#11 2012-07-18 16:49:01

Mr. Alex
Member
Registered: 2010-08-26
Posts: 623

Re: SystemD ugly boot

thoho180192 wrote:

Why does systemD have to be so ugly when booting?

Looks like Debian. I wouldn't say ugly. Just different. The most beautiful booting IMO has Gentoo. Even better than Arch.

Offline

#12 2012-08-06 19:02:30

flying sheep
Member
Registered: 2012-02-29
Posts: 79

Re: SystemD ugly boot

heh, i have this first-nerd-problem, too.

surely the only way is to patch systemd to use arch-blue?

Offline

#13 2012-08-07 14:32:53

thoho180192
Member
Registered: 2012-05-08
Posts: 57

Re: SystemD ugly boot

Think so wink

Offline

#14 2012-08-21 19:47:42

burninate
Member
Registered: 2012-07-28
Posts: 22

Re: SystemD ugly boot

It's systemd not SystemD

Offline

#15 2012-08-21 23:13:49

ANOKNUSA
Member
Registered: 2010-10-22
Posts: 2,141

Re: SystemD ugly boot

I think we all know what the OP meant.

Offline

#16 2012-08-22 03:16:56

muffinss
Member
From: united states
Registered: 2011-02-07
Posts: 54

Re: SystemD ugly boot

I switched over to systemd and I have to say,  I am amazed how fast it boots up. I really don't mind that it isn't pretty because it doesn't stay on the loading screen for very long. Like three seconds for me lol.

Offline

#17 2012-08-25 18:09:31

flying sheep
Member
Registered: 2012-02-29
Posts: 79

Re: SystemD ugly boot

wow, i’ve located how it’s done:

in the file systemd/src/core/job.c is a function job_print_status_message(Unit *u, JobType t, JobResult result)

it contains this:

                switch (result) {

                case JOB_DONE:
                        if (u->condition_result)
                                unit_status_printf(u, ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_GREEN_ON "  OK  " ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_OFF, format, unit_description(u));
                        break;

                case JOB_FAILED:
                        unit_status_printf(u, ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_RED_ON "FAILED" ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_OFF, format, unit_description(u));
                        unit_status_printf(u, "", "See 'systemctl status %s' for details.", u->id);
                        break;

                case JOB_DEPENDENCY:
                        unit_status_printf(u, ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_YELLOW_ON "DEPEND" ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_OFF, format, unit_description(u));
                        break;

                case JOB_TIMEOUT:
                        unit_status_printf(u, ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_RED_ON " TIME " ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_OFF, format, unit_description(u));
                        break;

                default:
                        ;
                }

all hard-coded! man, that’s not going to change sad

Offline

#18 2012-08-25 18:18:49

Trilby
Forum Moderator
From: Massachusetts, USA
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 13,810
Website

Re: SystemD ugly boot

flying sheep wrote:

all hard-coded! man, that’s not going to change sad

Why not?  Just use the constant ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_BLUE_ON if it exists, or change the definition of ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_GREEN_ON to actually be blue.

Hell, it could hardly be easier to change.


InterrobangSlider
• How's my coding? See this page.
• How's my moderating? Feel free to email any concerns, complaints, or objections.

Offline

#19 2012-08-27 03:19:32

thoho180192
Member
Registered: 2012-05-08
Posts: 57

Re: SystemD ugly boot

Anyone got that code working?

Offline

#20 2012-09-20 05:15:47

z1lt0id
Member
Registered: 2012-09-20
Posts: 168

Re: SystemD ugly boot

I had some warning messages pop regarding AMDs cool and quiet which is a known bug in the kernel.  So I just installed Plymouth so I didn't have to look at it. wink

Offline

#21 2012-09-20 13:20:26

bwat47
Member
Registered: 2009-10-07
Posts: 637

Re: SystemD ugly boot

I wouldn't call it ugly just because its not blue, I think it looks fine.

Offline

#22 2012-09-20 21:15:24

MrCode
Member
Registered: 2010-02-06
Posts: 373

Re: SystemD ugly boot

Trilby wrote:

Why not?  Just use the constant ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_BLUE_ON if it exists, or change the definition of ANSI_HIGHLIGHT_GREEN_ON to actually be blue.

Hell, it could hardly be easier to change.

I think flying sheep would simply rather not have to recompile systemd just to change one simple thing that (IMHO) really should be externally configurable.

As for me, I don't even see them; I have 'quiet' in my kernel cmd line.

EDIT: Not to mention, you'd have to re-apply this patch every time a systemd update rolled around.

Last edited by MrCode (2012-09-20 21:39:06)

Offline

#23 2012-09-20 23:16:20

cfr
Member
From: Cymru
Registered: 2011-11-27
Posts: 5,662

Re: SystemD ugly boot

It should be configurable for accessibility reasons. Red/green colour blindness is the most common form and people shouldn't have to recompile systemd in order to easily distinguish successes from failures.


How To Ask Questions The Smart Way | Help Vampires

Arch Linux | x86_64 | GPT | EFI boot | grub2 | systemd | LVM2 on LUKS
Lenovo x121e | Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-2367M CPU @ 1.40GHz GenuineIntel | Intel Centrino Wireless-N 1000 | US keyboard with Euro | 320G 7200 RPM Seagate HDD

Offline

#24 2012-09-21 07:28:49

kokoko3k
Member
Registered: 2008-11-14
Posts: 1,482

Re: SystemD ugly boot

@cfr: Good point!

Offline

#25 2012-09-21 18:22:18

alexanderthegre
Member
Registered: 2012-07-29
Posts: 66

Re: SystemD ugly boot

It should be configurable for accessibility reasons. Red/green colour blindness is the most common form and people shouldn't have to recompile systemd in order to easily distinguish successes from failures.

I'm red-green colorblin-- wait a second, it's green!? [/joke]

Really, though, this should be configurable. I'll look at the code and see if I could write a patch. (I'm not that great of a coder, but this shouldn't be too hard.)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB