Are you intentionally misrepresenting this or are you actually missing these? Also: This isn’t about diskspace. Obviously every halfway modern PC can provide the disk space to house the systemd binaries. Disk is cheap but crucially not necessarily tied to complexity. A simple application can take Gigs and still be simple if it includes a lot of resources (graphical, audio, whatever). And a very complex thing can “only” take a few megabytes if it only includes code. Like systemd does.
Note that I am a (mostly) happy user of systemd. I am just annoyed at people misrepresenting facts to fight anti-systemd-bullshit.
It’s weird ldd didn’t find libssytemd.so !
I have an old system, apparently libsystemd-core and libsystemd-shared weren’t a thing back in 2021 on … ubuntu focal
As I said: I didn’t mean massive in the sense of “disk space is an expensive resource”. Disk is cheap nowadays. I meant massive as in “there is a lot of code and by that a lot of complexity in this one binary”. You just inferred I meant bloat. I get that that is my fault for not specifying it the first time But I already explained I didn’t mean that so I don’t really get why you keep riding that 10 meg point.
Ok, sorry I don’t understand the problem, beyond the loss of modularity, that you can pick and choose different components for service/network/login/logging and timers but even if they were each distinct entities, would they really be less complex as a whole ?
These core system might even be more complex if they had to accommodate modular ways of doing things instead of relying on a uniform and consistent framework between them.
I agree from something like an embed system, like this openwrt WAP system that has just 4 megs of flash for the entire thing including a very complete web user interface, 10 meg for just these core services is giganormous and systemd is inappropriate. But for the average server and desktop with so much as dozens of megs of disk space, I feel the single coherent, reliable, universal systemd is pretty great once you learn it’s basic logic. I feel it’s actually less complex to use than what came before it, more predictable, more comfortable than sysv which generally lacked structure.
I dont have a problem with systemd. I have a problem with people claiming systemd doesn’t have a massive non-modular blob of code at it’s core. There is no need to misrepresent what systemd is to deflect systemd critics.
Again, please read what I am writing. I don’t care about the disk space. And I don’t have a problem with systemd itself.
[XXX@YYY]$ ls -lh /usr/lib/libsystemd.so.0.40.0 /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-core-257.7-1.so /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-shared-257.7-1.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1.2M Jun 25 14:42 /usr/lib/libsystemd.so.0.40.0 -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 2.4M Jun 25 14:42 /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-core-257.7-1.so -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 4.5M Jun 25 14:42 /usr/lib/systemd/libsystemd-shared-257.7-1.soAre you intentionally misrepresenting this or are you actually missing these? Also: This isn’t about diskspace. Obviously every halfway modern PC can provide the disk space to house the systemd binaries. Disk is cheap but crucially not necessarily tied to complexity. A simple application can take Gigs and still be simple if it includes a lot of resources (graphical, audio, whatever). And a very complex thing can “only” take a few megabytes if it only includes code. Like systemd does.
Note that I am a (mostly) happy user of systemd. I am just annoyed at people misrepresenting facts to fight anti-systemd-bullshit.
It’s weird ldd didn’t find libssytemd.so ! I have an old system, apparently libsystemd-core and libsystemd-shared weren’t a thing back in 2021 on … ubuntu focal
Sorry but there is a libsystemd-shared listed in your screenshot
ok well still not over 10 meg, I don’t know, doesn’t seem like bloat to me still
As I said: I didn’t mean massive in the sense of “disk space is an expensive resource”. Disk is cheap nowadays. I meant massive as in “there is a lot of code and by that a lot of complexity in this one binary”. You just inferred I meant bloat. I get that that is my fault for not specifying it the first time But I already explained I didn’t mean that so I don’t really get why you keep riding that 10 meg point.
Ok, sorry I don’t understand the problem, beyond the loss of modularity, that you can pick and choose different components for service/network/login/logging and timers but even if they were each distinct entities, would they really be less complex as a whole ?
These core system might even be more complex if they had to accommodate modular ways of doing things instead of relying on a uniform and consistent framework between them.
I agree from something like an embed system, like this openwrt WAP system that has just 4 megs of flash for the entire thing including a very complete web user interface, 10 meg for just these core services is giganormous and systemd is inappropriate. But for the average server and desktop with so much as dozens of megs of disk space, I feel the single coherent, reliable, universal systemd is pretty great once you learn it’s basic logic. I feel it’s actually less complex to use than what came before it, more predictable, more comfortable than sysv which generally lacked structure.
I dont have a problem with systemd. I have a problem with people claiming systemd doesn’t have a massive non-modular blob of code at it’s core. There is no need to misrepresent what systemd is to deflect systemd critics.
Again, please read what I am writing. I don’t care about the disk space. And I don’t have a problem with systemd itself.