Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
Ubuntu Operating Systems Linux

Ubuntu 15.04 Released, First Version To Feature systemd 494

jones_supa writes: The final release of Ubuntu 15.04 is now available. A modest set of improvements are rolling out with this spring's Ubuntu. While this means the OS can't rival the heavy changelogs of releases past, the adage "don't fix what isn't broken" is clearly one 15.04 plays to. The headline change is systemd being featured first time in a stable Ubuntu release, which replaces the inhouse UpStart init system. The Unity desktop version 7.3 receives a handful of small refinements, most of which aim to either fix bugs or correct earlier missteps (for example, application menus can now be set to be always visible). The Linux version is 3.19.3 further patched by Canonical. As usual, the distro comes with fresh versions of various familiar applications.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Ubuntu 15.04 Released, First Version To Feature systemd

Comments Filter:
  • SystemD added? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 24, 2015 @10:19AM (#49544837)

    Then it's simple.

    "We changed everything."

    No wonder it was short.

    • Re:SystemD added? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TWX ( 665546 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @10:25AM (#49544883)
      I don't see how the summary's, 'don't fix what isn't broken,' statement applies in this case.
      • Re: SystemD added? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        If I had mod points ...

        PERHAPS someone could define what was broken so badly in init that the whole lot was replaced. I so dearly would like to know.

        • Re: SystemD added? (Score:5, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 24, 2015 @11:41AM (#49545509)

          It's not that a single thing was broken, it's that the combined deficiencies were impacting software management. It's an evolutionary dead end. Systemd is being actively maintained and documented and implemented in ways that allow it to better interact with the free software ecosystem.

          At its core, it includes a lot of fixes for classic init that you would have to implement separately if you use classic init.

          Services are easily manageable.
          Booting is compartmentalized to allow for easy debugging(Items report success or failure individually, in order, and with consistency).
          Intrinsic functions and customizations are separated.
          Items do not necessarily rely on other items' dependency lists to configure themselves in the startup queue.

          System management is easier if services are manageable through a homogeneous interface. This effect trickles down to service creation, and then to package management. The distribution manages the packages, so it's in their best interest to pick an init that will help everything run smoothly.

          If the qualities of classic init are critical to your use-case, there are always other distributions available.

          • Re: SystemD added? (Score:5, Interesting)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 24, 2015 @12:05PM (#49545703)

            I just had a bootup of a laptop after what must have been a crash. Rather than fsck and check as under traditional init, it halted in systemd, because it had something to tell me. Which it didn't. So you log in to the single-user mode with a poor prompt (really, if you're asking me to log in, maybe you should *look* like a login). Then to see anything you need to run journalctl -xb. Nothing wrong with the disks as far as I could see. It seemed upset that there were a lot of logs in this boot. OK, so I reboot. And back to the same thing. You have to tell *it* to be OK that you've read the warnings. Then tell it to reboot. It being systemd.

                  So it's a regression, just extra layers of failure to get through when you already have an issue. All the same tools still have to run, but someone has to tie them together, and no one has. That's plebwork apparently.

          • Managability (Score:5, Insightful)

            by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @01:52PM (#49546499) Homepage Journal

            Services are easily manageable.

            A bunch of us who actually manage systems tend to disagree.
            Hundreds of DOS ini files, having to compile things instead of just modding a script, and not being able to step through a startup or shutdown process is not what we all consider easily manageable.

            If it really were easily manageable, it would not have caught so much flak.

            Sometimes you're the octopus, sometimes you're the girl.

            • Re:Managability (Score:4, Informative)

              by RabidReindeer ( 2625839 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @05:59PM (#49548031)

              Thanks to systemd, every time I get a kernel update, I can look forwards to spending 4 hours trying to get the box to boot again. EVERY freaking time!

              In Fedora 21, "single" boot mode doesn't even present a the filesystem you need to repair. I finally had to resort to a rescue CD. Not all my machines have CD drives attached anymore.

          • Re: SystemD added? (Score:5, Insightful)

            by ZorinLynx ( 31751 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @03:42PM (#49547097) Homepage

            A recent of example I had that made me dislike systemd was a prototype RHEL7 system here that has ZFS-on-Linux support installed on it.

            When you boot it up, there's around a 50/50 chance whether the ZFS filesystems will be mounted after boot. This is an inconsistency that, as a long time sysadmin, REALLY BOTHERS ME.

            Yes, I realize the root cause. ZFS has some dependency that is not starting before it. The dependency has to be declared in the appropriate service. However, with systemd we introduce the concept of "just because it came up correctly on this boot doesn't mean it will on the next one."

            And that is supremely frustrating. What if it weren't 50/50? What if the likelyhood it didn't come up was 1/100? Suddenly a routine reboot becomes a debugging mission, and I reboot again and it works. "Eh, must have been a transient problem." No it wasn't.

            With classic init you were fairly sure that the system's state was the same on every boot. Now it's a gamble. Good luck with that! This is why we're sticking with RHEL6 for the moment on production systems.

      • It reminds me of those 'That's now how this works. That's not how any of this works' commercials.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Calabacin ( 1358875 )
      It wasn't added. It has been there for a while. What's changed is that this time it's the default init.
  • systemd, eh? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @10:24AM (#49544871) Journal

    Systemd, eh? I predict that this thread will be filled with sensible and rational comments.

    Personally, I'm not a fan. It's overly complex to the point of being nearly undebuggable which makes it much harder to fix than the older system. Frankly it's also written by Pottering and given the awful experience I've had in the past and still sometimes have with PulseAudio, I don't really trust it. It's fine to have PA crap itself and require a restart (well, kind of annoying in the middle of watching TV, but survivable). I rather hope he's written systemd somewhat better.

    I know the distribution makers like it because packaging stuff is easier, but the end user experience (the end user being me) is IME inferior. But I care about debuggability, hackability and simplicity over having a very heavily intetegrated desktop "experience".

    • by TWX ( 665546 )
      Requiring a restart is a Windows trait. I was hoping that my Linux installations would be better than that.
      • Requiring a restart is a Windows trait. I was hoping that my Linux installations would be better than that.

        Er quite, though I was specifically referring to restarting PulseAudio, which takes a second not the entire computer. If the base underlying init process needs a restart, well, that's a different kettle of fish.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Rich0 ( 548339 )

          Requiring a restart is a Windows trait. I was hoping that my Linux installations would be better than that.

          Er quite, though I was specifically referring to restarting PulseAudio, which takes a second not the entire computer. If the base underlying init process needs a restart, well, that's a different kettle of fish.

          FWIW, the only time I restart systemd is to update the kernel, or I guess systemd itself (though the kernel changes more often and thus I can usually lump the latter in with the former). If you do live-patch your kernel, then you can do the same with systemd - it has a command to re-exec itself while preserving state.

          I'm sure it isn't perfect, but it is as robust as anything else I've used on Linux. There are fairly few daemons that I've never seen need a restart sometime in the last 10 years.

          • There are fairly few daemons that I've never seen need a restart sometime in the last 10 years.

            Pulse Audio. On one machine it's fine. On another it needs regular restarts.

            • by ruir ( 2709173 )
              Pulse audio in my server farm? Right... Many of us are using Linux for servers, you know?
          • by thaylin ( 555395 )

            As robust is not following the if it aint broke dont fix it model.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      > overly complex to the point of being nearly undebuggable

      Even worse is the fact that it ignores exit statuses and swallows stderr which makes it impossible to troubleshoot problems. While starting a process fails, systemd typicaly deletes all traces of why it happened.

      • Re:systemd, eh? (Score:5, Informative)

        by MSG ( 12810 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @01:06PM (#49546153)

        it ignores exit statuses and swallows stderr

        No, it doesn't. Exit statuses are the means by which it detects and reports that a service started successfully or failed. Stderr is recorded in both the journal and syslog messages file. I verified both on CentOS 7 and Fedora 21 a moment ago.

    • Re:systemd, eh? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by jcdr ( 178250 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @11:44AM (#49545525)

      I first used systemd on a complex custom embedded project that dynamically switch between multiple loads and it have saved me days of work compared to previous designs. Dependencies are managed the right way, and status+analysis tools are very good.

      PulseAudio is unstable I agree (I juste deleted a ~1.5GB .xsessionerror filled with insanity from it, and it crash at least one a day), but not so systemd, even if journald need some more work to fix some minor issues.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I know how much Slashdot loves Systemd and Ubuntu. Pairing them together? Wonderful. Can't wait to see your responses!

  • Fools rush in where Angels fear to tread.
    The world is coming down.
    At least the world of Free Software that was so close to my heart for the last 15+ years.
    The simplicity of U--nix has reached the EOL. So has modularity.
    Welcome, to new shores, the new U--s, full of mischievous monolithic blocks that accompany us from after PID 1 to shutdown and start our daemons, log us on, guide, lead, help, protect our systems and its users throughout the lifespan of their sessions. And beyond. From cradle to the grave - f

  • by wonkey_monkey ( 2592601 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @10:35AM (#49544957) Homepage

    the adage "don't fix what isn't broken" is clearly one 15.04 plays to.

    Uh huh...

    systemd [...] replaces the inhouse UpStart init system.

    Hmm.

  • SWEET (Score:2, Funny)

    by Khyber ( 864651 )

    Can't wait for the vulnerabilities I found and gave to some nice hacker friends to hit systemd right as it's hitting 'prime time' and beats it back into obscurity.

    • by ookaze ( 227977 )

      Can't wait for the vulnerabilities I found and gave to some nice hacker friends to hit systemd right as it's hitting 'prime time' and beats it back into obscurity.

      So you found vulnerabilities but don't even know how to exploit them ?
      People talking about things they don't even understand...

  • Systemd? No thanks.

  • Ubuntu vs Mint (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sir_Eptishous ( 873977 ) on Friday April 24, 2015 @10:42AM (#49545011) Homepage
    In the last year and a half I have tried several different Linux desktops to run on a small form factor Dell pc connected to my TV via HDMI.
    I settled on Ubuntu for a variety of reasons and was reasonably pleased with it.
    However, after a few weeks things started to go wrong.
    Errors, lockups and other things cropped up that started to really get old.
    I read forum posts, blogs, "kb" articles to fix the various issues I had with Ubuntu.

    Eventually I wiped it and reloaded it, and the same sorts of problems came back.

    I was ready to install Windows when I read someone mention Linux Mint.
    So I gave that a try.

    Like a cool spring breeze on a warm afternoon, Linux Mint was refreshing and met all my needs without problems.

    To this day I wonder why Mint works so well when Ubuntu Desktop was such a POS.
  • If I upgrade, will all the "phone home" processes to Canonical that I've disabled still stay disabled? 'cause my packet sniffer caught at least a couple of pings a minute before the purge. Same goes for all the Amazon / Cloud stuff. I hope that crap stays off my machine.
    • by ruir ( 2709173 )
      You could always pray to the sysadmin god. Or find an use to a novel concept, a firewall.

Top Ten Things Overheard At The ANSI C Draft Committee Meetings: (8) I'm on the committee and I *still* don't know what the hell #pragma is for.

Working...