[sf-lug] systemd 8-O ... ; -) Re: SF-LUG meeting notes + abt some lightweight distros

[Michael Paoli]

> From: aaronco36 <aaronco36 at SDF.ORG>
> Subject: [sf-lug] SF-LUG meeting notes + abt some lightweight distros
> Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 04:56:30 +0000 (UTC)

> While the above three Debian/Ubuntu-based systemd distros *can* have  
> their init's and other integrated components teased out as per Rick  
> M's and maestro's postings from the past on such -- see refs [16]  
> through [19] -- at the same time I found it much easier not having  
> to take the more extensive after-the-fact steps to purge systems  
> from systemd as described at ref [20]. Instead, it's much easier to  
> start-off with one or more of the systemd-free distros listed in ref  
> [21] from the get-go.
>
> [16]http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/2016q4/012277.html
> [17]http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Debian/openrc-conversion.html
> [18]http://linuxmafia.com/pipermail/sf-lug/2017q4/012899.html
> [19]http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> [20]http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Alternatives_to_systemd
> [21]http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Linux_distributions_without_systemd

Well, I guess I come at it with a rather different perspective.  :-)
E.g. Debian.  Can't exactly say I "hate" systemd, ... though there are
(at best?) many things I very much do not like about it.
But for a quite reasonable distribution (e.g. Debian :-)) that offers
lots of choice (Debian sure as heck does!), I'm definitely somewhere in
the:
Don't throw the baby out with the bath water!
Now, whether one does or may consider the "baby" to be portions of
systemd, or systemd in its entirety, or distribution(s) that default
to systemd, well, that's another matter.

But personally, in choosing between:
o A friggin' fantastic operating system (Debian) that happens to default to
   systemd, but that offers one or more other fine alternatives to systemd
   and highly well and easily supports them, or/vs.:
o Some other distribution/derivative, that is free of systemd, but is very
   highly less common than Debian (or even very large distributions based upon
   Debian - or maybe even some other friggin' fantastic operating system
   that's free of systemd (if such even exists) ... anyway, something with a
   most notably much smaller installed base and/or support base ...
Anyway, I'm exceedingly inclined to go with the former, rather than the
latter.  And install/run Debian with and/or without systemd as and where
I see fit (at present, all "my" Linux installations are Debian, and all but
one of them runs systemd - but the one that doesn't is also quite substantial
(it's my personal laptop) - but several of the others are nothin' to
sneeze at either (e.g. BALUG VM that hosts most all things BALUG.org and also
most all things SF-LUG.org(/.com) except SF-LUG's lists, another physical
host that's former nominal home for both BALUG and (former) SF-LUG VMs
(and now does semi-regular duty hosting the BALUG VM ... most notably when
my personal laptop goes on field trips with me - e.g. to LUG meetings).

Oh, and in case one was wondering why my personal laptop doesn't use systemd
for init system? ... When Debian defaulted to systemd upon upgrade, I  
initially
went with that ... but systemd gave that particular host very substantial
grief ... I putzed with it a moderate bit trying to get it to behave
sufficiently reasonably ... after a short bit (and in middle of a major
upgrade) - I was basically the heck with that - easy enough to switch away
from systemd to init system I had before ... done.  Have yet to have any
substantial motivation on that host to switch - or attempt to switch - back
to systemd - so thus far it remains not using systemd for init system.  The
other hosts I've dealt with haven't given me any grief with systemd on
Debian (other than the quite expected systemd annoyances/differences which
even Debian didn't undo if one decides/defaults to systemd).

I suppose I could also sit around here and argue the case how (super-)simple
it is to install and run Debian without (nearly) any systemd at all on it.
But I won't (quite) do that.  But running and maintaining Debian without
(or almost entirely without) systemd and any actual systemd components
thereof is pretty dang trivial.  I find it no harder at all than before
Debian changed default init system to systemd ... heck, it's probably even
easier now (though likely independent of anything to do with systemd).
And it is dang well documented how to do a Debian install without systemd
/ install using some other init system - may not be super easy/trivial - not
as simple as just click some option to say "no" to systemd, ... but it's not
all that dang hard either, and it exceedingly well documented on how to
do it.  And running Debian without systemd is dirt simple.  I've been doing
it for many years now.

Anyway, I'd be much more inclined to run Debian, and if/as desired
without systemd, rather than run to some one-off distribution that is
free of systemd.

Some other points to keep in mind:
Much as some/many of us may dislike systemd and/or many of it's
(mis-)"features" and/or components thereof ...
*Most* things Linux are moving in the direction of systemd.  Sure, there
may still be significant holdouts/exceptions ... thus far, *but* ...
some major desktop environments have moved to depend upon systemd [8-O],
Fedora has gone the way of systemd,
Debian *defaults* to systemd (as does Ubuntu/*buntu - feel free to correct
   if I'm not right on all the *buntu bits),
there's not a whole lot in the way of major Linux distributions that
aren't in the situation of at least one of: has gone the way of systemd
or is highly probable in future to do so, defaults to systemd (or will
likely go that way).
systemd, like it or not (or hate it), it's got a highly large installed
based among Linux distributions, including many major Linux distributions,
so, at least for many of us, that means we ought be/become at least reasonably
proficient/knowledgeable regarding use/maintenance, etc. with and around
systemd.  Same applies for any other init system that has substantial
installed base on Linux - or at least most Linux realms.
Anyway, certainly not sayin' systemd is great, but ... well, Debian is.  :-)
And yes, Debian, choices, ... don't have to go with the default of
systemd on Debian, and going with init system on Debian other than systemd
is really pretty dang easy.  Heck, I don't think it's really much more
difficult than loading some non-free firmware at install time when doing
a Debian install.  If you can do or figure out how to do that, doing an
install without systemd on Debian is about comparable level of
(non-)complexity/difficulty.
But hey, your choice ... whatever distro you want!  :-)
(And Debian ... systemd for init system ... or not!  :-))
Heck, you could roll your own distro, and write your own init system.  ;-)

Oh, also, Debian does a very good job of pulling systemd apart (and also
throwing crud out and/or "banishing" it to separate optional packages for
systemd).  So, ... all the cruft/blot and other problems that come with
systemd ... well, with Debian, one can run systemd and *not* have all the
cr*p that comes with systemd.  Debian has done a pretty dang fine job
of separating out from systemd that which can (or ought!) be separated
out, and often generally cleaning up and fixing of various issues within
systemd.  Anyway, just sayin' ... mighty fine distribution, ... and if you
don't like systemd, well, Debian also makes it pretty easy to not use systemd
for one's init system.