User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Posted Jan 27, 2013 20:42 UTC (Sun) by lu_zero (guest, #72556)
Parent article: Poettering: The Biggest Myths

https://plus.google.com/113237307210359236747/posts/PCfHd...

That pretty much says everything.

systemd has interesting ideas and wrong implementations for a number of usecases.

OpenRC covers better more usecases and is not so terrible for the rest w/out forcing dependencies nor requiring specific software (in fact you can use it pretty much everywhere, even as secondary rc-system)


(Log in to post comments)

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Posted Jan 27, 2013 21:26 UTC (Sun) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129) [Link]

> That pretty much says everything.
Actually, it says nothing at all as the guy is confused. The session bus and the system bus run in different dbus-daemon instances, so unless both crash (unlikely), either the desktop or systemd is affected, but not both.

Also, I just tried "crashing" the system bus dbus-daemon (the one with the system bus) on my Fedora 18 system with a SIGKILL. Systemd respawned it, I can still log in on the console, the desktop (KDE Plasma 4.9.5) works fine. If dbus-daemon had actually crashed, I probably wouldn't have noticed at all. So sorry, but I'm not impressed. Try harder.

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Posted Jan 28, 2013 3:38 UTC (Mon) by zlynx (subscriber, #2285) [Link]

I *have* seen a dbus daemon get wedged. It was a few years ago and there may have been a kernel bug involved.

It definitely had messages waiting to process but it was stuck in a poll somehow.

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Posted Jan 29, 2013 9:05 UTC (Tue) by ovitters (subscriber, #27950) [Link]

In addition to what you said: Every so often dbus has security bugs. No software is without bugs, but at least the heavy usage of dbus ensures that at least a lot of bugs have been caught.

Alternative would be to make something like dbus yourself. That still will have bugs, could potentially have sscurity issues, etc. Maybe would be smaller than dbus, but then also would not have all the support that dbus has.

In short: No clue what is better (roll your own vs rely on dbus), but disagree with people who suggest dbus is "obviously wrong" (to be clear: do not mean you :)).

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Posted Jan 29, 2013 9:25 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]

There was another recent bug that might have had the same effect. Same symptoms, poll()ers and select()ers on localhost got stuck after a while.

TBH, if something like that breaks, you're lucky to have a system at all. Those syscalls are *so* widely used...

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Posted Jan 28, 2013 21:53 UTC (Mon) by lu_zero (guest, #72556) [Link]

You didn't try the right way or Fedora found a way to avoid the situation, if it is the latter I'd love to know how.

dbus _does_ have this kind of issues and moving in the kernel the dispatcher/broker does help mitigating some of them (if the implementation doesn't share the same issues, but I hope it does not).

Poettering: The Biggest Myths

Posted Jan 29, 2013 14:36 UTC (Tue) by foom (subscriber, #14868) [Link]

So the argument is "we wrote some terrible software with crap performance and poor failure modes. Guess it needs to be in the kernel." What?? Surely these problems are fixable in user space!


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds