You are not logged in.

#1 2012-10-06 08:07:59

binskipy2u
Banned
Registered: 2009-09-14
Posts: 212

sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

I've been using arch for a while.. and I just pacman -Syu  and usually replace things just to keep up with what pacman says.. no problems so far...
but all I've been readin about systemd, I pacman -Ss systemd and it says installed.. does that mean that with a normal update since the change, everything installed and is working..(not that i'm having any issues at all or got any error messages) I'm just wondering..

sorry for the stupidity if you can call it that of this post.. but I'm just wondering..


"Sometimes you comfort the afflicted, other times you AFFLICT the COMFORTABLE"

Offline

#2 2012-10-06 08:09:26

tomk
Forum Fellow
From: Ireland
Registered: 2004-07-21
Posts: 9,838

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

No, that means it's installed. If you decide you want to use it, configure your system to use it - the wiki has the details.

Offline

#3 2012-10-06 08:18:32

binskipy2u
Banned
Registered: 2009-09-14
Posts: 212

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

i have my system tweaked with rc.conf/ sysctl/ and a few other additions to files and I like the way my system runs.. is there any real advantage to 1.systemd 2. fixing what isnt broken? or will it end up broken as updates come in the future? just wondering.. thanks..


"Sometimes you comfort the afflicted, other times you AFFLICT the COMFORTABLE"

Offline

#4 2012-10-06 08:53:18

Scimmia
Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2012-09-01
Posts: 4,975

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

binskipy2u wrote:

is there any real advantage to 1.systemd

Parallel service startup, automatic dependency resolution/startup ordering, service monitoring/restarting, etc. Nice things to have, but nothing you can't live without.

binskipy2u wrote:

2. fixing what isnt broken? or will it end up broken as updates come in the future? just wondering.. thanks..

Your system will be broken as updates come, rc.conf configuration is being gradually depreciated. According to the devs, initscrips will continue to work, but you need to switch over to systemd style configuration files at the very least.

Offline

#5 2012-10-06 09:03:25

tomk
Forum Fellow
From: Ireland
Registered: 2004-07-21
Posts: 9,838

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

Systemd is the devs' choice - that doesn't mean it has to be yours. Arch always gives you the choice, but obviously alternatives that are not dev-supported will require more effort on your part.

Offline

#6 2012-10-06 10:11:50

ixnine
Member
Registered: 2008-11-01
Posts: 60

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

tomk wrote:

Systemd is the devs' choice - that doesn't mean it has to be yours. Arch always gives you the choice, but obviously alternatives that are not dev-supported will require more effort on your part.

Yes, he is right. For example I want zsh instead of bash, so I replaced my bash. It is still really your choice, but in the future you have to learn on your own how to fix your system if you want to continue using initscripts.

Offline

#7 2012-10-06 16:17:47

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

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

binskipy2u wrote:

i have my system tweaked with rc.conf/ sysctl/ and a few other additions to files and I like the way my system runs.. is there any real advantage to 1.systemd 2. fixing what isnt broken? or will it end up broken as updates come in the future? just wondering.. thanks..

systemd is not yet the default, so no need to move yet if you don't want to. However, it will be the default in the near future, and then you will likely get problems if you chose not to use it (I posted to the arch-general ML outlining what it would take to keep initscripts working as a community project, but it looks like nothing came of it).

Offline

#8 2012-10-07 20:04:07

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

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

If the OP is serious about this, I would suggest that the OP do some research on SystemD; the open-ended nature of these questions ("Is there any real advantage..?) sounds like major flame-/concern-troll-bait.

Offline

#9 2012-10-07 20:16:51

WonderWoofy
Member
From: Los Gatos, CA
Registered: 2012-05-19
Posts: 8,412

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

The OP claims to have been reading about systemd, but I feel if (s)he had real a single post or the first paragraph of the systemd wiki, the answer would have been obvious.

@ANOKNUSA, when I first started getting to know systemd, I too used to type SystemD.  But I was quickly corrected, as it is apparently all lowercase because it is like other daemons (ie ntpd, sshd, etc.).  It doesn't really bother me, but don't be surprised if someone gets all techinal on you.  See the section "Spelling" on this page:
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd

Offline

#10 2012-10-07 23:33:31

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

Re: sorry for the simplicity of this.. SystemD is it "automatic"?

Bah, that's something I should probably know by now. tongue  I tutor English comp for a living, so I end up capitalizing practically every semi-proper noun that spills out of my head and onto the keyboard out of habit.

Last edited by ANOKNUSA (2012-10-07 23:33:45)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB