Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Those who need the complexity or some features should adopt the technical debt, there is zero rationale to enable it by default and impose it on everyone.

Indeed. Even if I have multiple ethernet interfaces, I'd prefer to map a MAC address to eth[0-9] myself. But most machines only have one ethernet interface and one WiFi interface anyway.

These things pop up all over the place. E.g.: why would I want to have NetworkManager on a server, which never switch networks and need to set up a VPN connection? Why do I need firewalld on a server? I rarely need a zone-based firewall on my laptop (probably like most users, I just block all incoming traffic), let alone a server.

Layer upon layer is piled to solve hypothetical situations that do not arise for > 90% of the population.

(I do like systemd as a service manager, but systemd and the surrounding ecosystem has made it terribly difficult to understand and debug UNIX systems.)



Most of my machines have more than 1 wired interface, and guess what? Those predictable names have caused me way more problems than they ever fixed. And those problems have always been harder to fix. Just stable names, like udev used to do were enough for nearly everything.

> why would I want to have NetworkManager on a server, which never switch networks and need to set up a VPN connection?

It's funnier because NetworkManager must wait for the filesystems to be mounted, but then, networked filesystems (that are, those ones, important there) need a functioning network that NetworkManager postpones to after it's up.


why would I want [insert a systemd design decision]

Because systemd wants to be The One Ring of Linux, and tries to be all things to all systems and all people.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: