5 ms·

I kinda like how a good chunk of the community complains we are "too monolithic", and the other side of the community complains we have "too many binaries". We

I kinda like how a good chunk of the community complains we are "too monolithic", and the other side of the community complains we have "too many binaries". We can't win with you guys, can we? Lennart

michaelmrose 8y ago
In what universe does the number of binaries have anything to do with how monolithic something is?
cuillevel3 8y ago
Not that it matters, but I'm really happy about systemd. Sure I have to learn new things, sometimes stuff breaks, but that has always been the case. For me most problems were with upgrading Linux distributions. Anyhow it's great to have less distribution specific stuff and less shell scripts. Thank you and all the other systemd devs.
pdkl95 8y ago
> "too monolithic" ... "too many binaries" > We can't win Juxtaposing two unrelated issues usually isn't a winning strategy.
rauhl 8y ago
Multiple binaries can still be part of a monolithic system (just like multiple services can still be part of a monolithic system in the web services world). A well-archetected system has strong separation of concerns — and well-defined, reasonable interfaces — between components. If I’m writing a piece of code and I start wanting to rewrite the world around it, that’s a sign that I’m probably doing the wrong thing. In the case of systemd, you actually have a decent case that a lot of things in Linux and the rest of the POSIX world could stand to be improved. A good, clean, portable, systems-focused approach could tackle all those things head on.
na85 8y ago
You really don't understand the complaint? It's that the plethora of binaries are too tightly coupled and are not at all modular or interchangeable, which is materially the same as being a monolith. I think you are smart enough to know this, and are just feigning ignorance.

5 ms·

I kinda like how a good chunk of the community complains we are "too monolithic", and the other side of the community complains we have "too many binaries". We

by poettering 8y ago

michaelmrose 8y ago
In what universe does the number of binaries have anything to do with how monolithic something is?
cuillevel3 8y ago
Not that it matters, but I'm really happy about systemd. Sure I have to learn new things, sometimes stuff breaks, but that has always been the case. For me most problems were with upgrading Linux distributions. Anyhow it's great to have less distribution specific stuff and less shell scripts. Thank you and all the other systemd devs.
pdkl95 8y ago
> "too monolithic" ... "too many binaries" > We can't win Juxtaposing two unrelated issues usually isn't a winning strategy.
rauhl 8y ago
Multiple binaries can still be part of a monolithic system (just like multiple services can still be part of a monolithic system in the web services world). A well-archetected system has strong separation of concerns — and well-defined, reasonable interfaces — between components. If I’m writing a piece of code and I start wanting to rewrite the world around it, that’s a sign that I’m probably doing the wrong thing. In the case of systemd, you actually have a decent case that a lot of things in Linux and the rest of the POSIX world could stand to be improved. A good, clean, portable, systems-focused approach could tackle all those things head on.
na85 8y ago
You really don't understand the complaint? It's that the plethora of binaries are too tightly coupled and are not at all modular or interchangeable, which is materially the same as being a monolith. I think you are smart enough to know this, and are just feigning ignorance.