Siduction Forum

Siduction Forum => Experimental => Topic started by: hefee on 2013/01/30, 14:25:26

Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: hefee on 2013/01/30, 14:25:26
Hey,

for all who want to test systemd:

  * install systemd
  * add init=/bin/systemd in the grub parameter

ready.

Yes it is that simple. And the best: You don't have to remove sysvinit. So if systemd doesn't work like expected, than you can remove the grub parameter and boot with sysvinit.

With 44-8 also full encryped systems (LUKS+LVM) are supported. The mantainers plan is to get systemd to the point, that it is a fully supported initsystem.
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: spacepenguin on 2013/02/09, 13:54:36
What are the advantages of systemd over sysvinit from a user's point of view?
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: agaida on 2013/02/09, 14:27:50
systemd has a few nice advantages:
* can start stop services parallel
* prevent race conditions
* better dependencies as systemv

With the use of systemd started via kernelparameter you can test it without fear. If it works - ok, if not remove the parameter. The disadvantages atm are:
* Systemd isn't mature. It's under heavy development but should be now in a usable state.
* it's Lennartware
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: spacepenguin on 2013/02/09, 15:17:27
Lennartware? ;) Like pulseaudio?
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: agaida on 2013/02/09, 15:25:50
Es kann nur einen geben...

https://bbs.archlinux.de/viewtopic.php?pid=286780#p286780 fortfolgend.
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: spacepenguin on 2013/02/10, 13:16:59
Pöse.... ;)
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: ralul on 2013/02/10, 16:42:55
Lennart and shortly visible Kai Sievers:
Code: [Select]
wget \
http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/fosdem-video/2013/maintracks/Janson/systemd,_Two_Years_Later.webm


not looked into it yet:
Code: [Select]
wget \
http://ftp.heanet.ie/mirrors/fosdem-video/2013/crossdistro/systemd_in_Debian.webm
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: ralul on 2013/02/10, 20:15:41
Watching "systemd_in_Debian.webm"
it is all about SysV compatibility. Main reason: Bsd Kernel in Debian. As
Tollef Fog Heen
Michael Biebl
point out: There is nobody using Gnome with a bsd kernel. Thus they will drop support for Gnome-3.8 running with Bsd kernels following the release of Debian-wheezy.

An interesting point of the first lecture (Lennart): He mentions lvm ruins systemd booting performance. Therefore he showed an extra "show-case" installation booting a fedora stripped of lvm.
Title: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: DeepDayze on 2013/02/10, 20:58:42
Quote from: "ralul"
Watching "systemd_in_Debian.webm"
it is all about SysV compatibility. Main reason: Bsd Kernel in Debian. As
Tollef Fog Heen
Michael Biebl
point out: There is nobody using Gnome with a bsd kernel. Thus they will drop support for Gnome-3.8 running with Bsd kernels following the release of Debian-wheezy.

An interesting point of the first lecture (Lennart): He mentions lvm ruins systemd booting performance. Therefore he showed an extra "show-case" installation booting a fedora stripped of lvm.


So LVM sort of breaks systemd? Not exactly a good thing so maybe systemd needs to become aware of LVM based systems then
Title: RE: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: dibl on 2013/02/10, 21:35:31
I wonder whether BTRFS has the same issue as LVM. If not, and BTRFS can be declared "stable", then LVM can be deprecated. Probably way out there in the future, though.
Title: RE: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: ralul on 2013/02/10, 22:39:27
@DeepDayze, LVM is not breaking the system but slowing down the boot. And yes, the future is BtrFs. I wonder if the delaying of "stable" BtrFs is due to including new features?
Title: RE: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: dibl on 2013/02/10, 23:40:29
BTRFS fsck and scrub are working today, and defrag is possible if you are worried about it.  So I don't know what we are waiting for to call BTRFS stable.
Title: Re: RE: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: DeepDayze on 2013/02/11, 01:18:35
Quote from: "dibl"
BTRFS fsck and scrub are working today, and defrag is possible if you are worried about it.  So I don't know what we are waiting for to call BTRFS stable.


Has anyone tried testing it out with various scenarios such as power failure, copying big files around, resizing partitions, etc?

Filesystem issues can be hard to debug IMO
Title: RE: Re: RE: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: dibl on 2013/02/11, 02:28:25
I have not had a power failure, but I have had 3 or 4 hard crashes as we discussed on the other thread.  I have 2 WD hard drives in a BTRFS filesystem, and today I ran fsck and scan on that filesyestem -- it reported zero errors.  So I think it is pretty stable and robust.
Title: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: DeepDayze on 2013/02/11, 02:42:45
Quote from: "dibl"
I have not had a power failure, but I have had 3 or 4 hard crashes as we discussed on the other thread.  I have 2 WD hard drives in a BTRFS filesystem, and today I ran fsck and scan on that filesyestem -- it reported zero errors.  So I think it is pretty stable and robust.


If all your data is there and not corrupted even after heavy use then that's a good thing
Title: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: systemd & siduction
Post by: timc on 2013/02/11, 14:37:23
I had a power failure a week or so ago with root on btrfs. No problems afterwards. That is just a single instance, though.

Tim
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: mariobros on 2013/02/14, 15:52:58
hi all,

im mariobros user and i use btrfs with root and i haven't nothing problem is very stable btrfs now on the failure power i have off eletricity power my adaptor. I think we btrfs can run fsck and btrfsck very faster and without problem!.
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: dibl on 2013/02/15, 00:07:23
Welcome to the forum, Mario!
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: Lanzi on 2013/02/15, 02:47:01
Mario, benvenuto qua!  :lol:
Title: systemd & siduction
Post by: mariobros on 2013/02/15, 18:43:24
thanks Lanzi, grazie mille Lanzi im happy use siduction and Debian dist!!! is my favorite and i like rolling release unstable LOL XD