On 14 June 2015 16:01:44 CEST, Steven Haigh <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 09:11:38 AM Steven Miano wrote:
>> In FC22 there is cockpit though, which does have a very nice WUI (Web
>User
>> Interface) for systemctl:
>> 
>> Here are a couple of screenshots for those features (cockpit has a
>> multitude of other great functionality as well though, including
>being able
>> to add additional hosts to any cockpit-ws).
>> 
>> Services (Target): http://i.imgur.com/TGkHHYf.png
>> 
>> Services (Target (abrt-ccpp.service): http://i.imgur.com/WhQaFPS.png
>
>Its times like this that I question what the hell we are doing in
>computing. 
>We have a init system that is that complex, it has a web interface (!)
>written 
>around it. What. The. Hell.
>
>That is a complete web server, with toolstack, to help configure simply
>
>starting a computer.
>
>Have we lost the plot with regards to OS concepts these days?


Okay, I'll bite.

That's also an angle to see this. I rather choose to see cockpit as a completely different project solving issues this project have considered worth solving. And it is possible through systemd's dbus API.  Cockpit is basically just an web interface for dbus.  It doesn't do anything else than to do dbus calls.

And I consider that impressive. Why?  Because if you don't like systemctl or Cockpit, you can write your own tools using the same dbus API. And the bonus is that it (in theory at least) should work out of the box on any systemd based distribution without any changes.  You can write your own management tools simplifying processes unique to your environment.

Cockpit is a pretty good demonstration of the powers of systemd, which also through the dbus API ensures operations a user requests are authorized properly.  A user lacking privileges will not be able to perform the requested operations.

So feel free to rant about the complexity of systemd. After having played around with systemd in a few of Fedora releases, SL7 and RHEL7, I cannot agree that systemd is such a complex beast, not in any way.  It is not worse than than upstart nor the older sysv init scripts. I honestly think that these anti-systemd rants are pure trash from people who have no interest in seeing that there are parts of the Linux universe which are in desperate need for improvements: System Management.  And if systemd+cockpit can in a longer run make Linux systems more understandable for old school Windows-admins, then just that is a big win in my opinion.

Another point of view: Ditching sysv init isn't a new thing. Upstart is another approach which is in SL6 and RHEL6.  In other OSes, Solaris went for SMF, Mac OSX chose launchd.  Sysv init worked wonderfully in the 70s, 80s and most of 90s, because the server needs where quite different back then. Nowadays systems live in a far more dynamic environments than earlier. And new challenges needs solutions appropriate to these new demands.  Otherwise we would still on a daily basis drive around in T-Fords.

--
kind regards,

David Sommerseth