レナート   Wunschkonzert, Ponyhof und Abenteuerspielplatz   ﻟﻴﻨﺎﺭﺕ

Fri, 19 Nov 2010

systemd Status Update

It has been a while since my last status update on systemd. Here's another short, incomprehensive status update on what we worked on for systemd since then.

And that's it for now. There's a lot of other stuff in the git commits, but most of it is smaller and I will it thus spare you.

We have come quite far in the last year. systemd is about a year old now, and we are now able to boot a system without legacy shell scripts remaining, something that appeared to be a task for the distant future.

All of this is available in systemd 13 and in F15/Rawhide as I type this. If you want to play around with this then consider installing Rawhide (it's fun!).

posted at: 04:30 | path: /projects | permanent link to this entry | 21 comments


Posted by Aaron Seigo at Fri Nov 19 05:13:28 2010
"Yupp, KDE folks, you can add an agent for this, too"

where is the documentation for the relevant API used to accomplish this?

Posted by alex at Fri Nov 19 06:22:18 2010
Lennart, what % of a boot time systemd is reducing in compare to a easy to read/manage sysV boot system?

I were trying to find the measurements, but never found any.

Posted by Anonymous at Fri Nov 19 07:36:44 2010
How easily could I disable the automatic cleaning of /tmp?  I lost useful bits one too many times before I turned off cleaning of /tmp on all my systems.  Plus, this seems like a good opportunity to find out how easily the built-in equivalents to init scripts allow configuration.

Posted by Michael at Fri Nov 19 08:20:46 2010
@Anoymous:
/etc/tmpfiles.d/systemd.conf contains (among others) those two lines:

d /tmp 1777 root root 10d
d /var/tmp 1777 root root 30d

Just comment them out and you're done.
For more info see http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/tmpfiles.d.html

Posted by Michael at Fri Nov 19 09:05:44 2010
>> In fact, shell scripts during early boot
>> are only used in exceptional cases

Why is LVM an "exceptional case"? It's the default to install Fedora on LVM after all. Would you say it is better to not use LVM or will there be better support for it in the future?

Posted by Dave Airlie at Fri Nov 19 09:49:06 2010
Hey Lennart, a lot of people use reboot -f when their system won't let them umount filesystems, like for when they've oopsed the kernel and want to remote reboot, so I hope you haven't actually removed proper forced reboot in favour of calling umounts which will just hang the system in the kernel if something has gone wrong in the storage subsystem.

Posted by bkor at Fri Nov 19 10:43:11 2010
Always nice to see the updates & new features of  systemd.

Posted by Anon2 at Fri Nov 19 10:57:40 2010
Always nice to see how an originally nice idea morphs into a Swiss Army Knife software. Next step to shave off a few more milliseconds of a boot time is to move the systemd code into the kernel.

Posted by Jaroslav Reznik at Fri Nov 19 11:07:11 2010
From one of Fedora's KDE folks - is it really so difficult to ping us and ask for help supporting yours technologies that come to Fedora? Same as with Polkit... It's not easy to catch it then if we don't know what to support.

Thanks Aaron for comment. /me is going to look for documentation...

Posted by Vasilis Vasaitis at Fri Nov 19 13:09:24 2010
Great stuff! The only thing that comes to mind is, you guys should really make sure to provide detailed documentation for the user/administrator, in man/texinfo format (ideally both). One really good thing about the traditional shell-based boot system is that it's extremely self-documenting: even if I don't know anything about how a distribution has its boot system set up I can start reading inittab and take it from there. With systemd inevitably a lot of the boot process becomes much more opaque, so there should be plenty of documentation about what it does, in what order, how everything is configured/modified/disabled, etc etc.

Posted by Lennart at Fri Nov 19 16:05:57 2010
Aaron, systemd is actually documented very well, in fact much better than most projects, however this interface isn't so far. Feel free to ping me if you need details. I don't bite. If KDE hackers want to be involved, then involve yourself, don't always wait for us to ping you.

alex: I am pretty sure systemd is much easier to manage than sysv. I am booting in 14s now a fully equipped F15 with crypto and everything. With sysv it used to be something like 26s or so. But on purpose I don't give out numbers like this since they are not necessarily reproducible. The speed-up is bigger if you have a system which starts more stuff anyway. And the measurements are highly dependent on your hardware.

Anonymous: you can configure that easily in the files Michael suggested. Instead of disabling those lines I however recommend simply replacing the last word in those lines. If you write "-" instead of 10d then the automatic cleanup is disabled. Note however that you are most likely doing something wrong if you store files you don't want to lose in /tmp.

Michael: yes, I believe we should no longer install LVM by default. It slows down boot considerably and is still not updated to today's hotpluggable dynamic world. And for the majority of all folks (especially laptop people) it offers zero benefit. In fact, Fedora is the only distribution enabling LVM by default, and I believe we should stop doing that. With the advent of btrfs volume management will become much nicer and future-proof anyway.

Posted by Lennart at Fri Nov 19 16:11:58 2010
Dave: traditional 'reboot -f' continues to exist.

Jaroslav: see my comment to Aaron regarding KDE involvement. Please consider this blog story my ping to you. I am happy to provide you with any information you need and reference implementations. I'd even be willing to review any code you guys might come up with to check if it does what it is supposed to do.

Vasilis: systemd documentation for admins is actually pretty good, much better than what most projects have. Just check out the man pages: http://0pointer.de/public/systemd-man/

Posted by Lennart at Fri Nov 19 17:09:12 2010
Jaroslav, Aaron: wrote some documentation of the algorithm now for you: http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/PasswordAgents -- Happy?

Posted by nate-m at Fri Nov 19 18:29:30 2010
"""Michael: yes, I believe we should no longer install LVM by default."""


When Btrfs gets up and going well then LVM will be redundant and inferior for most purposes. Hopefully it won't take long.

Then they can figure out how to integrate support for btrfs snapshots and volume management into systemd. :P

For example one of the more useful ways to use Btrfs is to create a new volume for each user. Then users can enable features like compression and encryption for their user. Also makes it useful for snapshotting users and applications.

And there is the btrfs plugin for yum for rolling back updates and such things.

Fun stuff. Lets hope it does not suck as much as LVM. :)

Posted by j at Fri Nov 19 19:16:18 2010
Is systemd only for sysv folks?

Posted by Lennart at Fri Nov 19 19:22:08 2010
j, uh? what do you mean by that? We (optionally) support SysV scripts as an alternative source of configuration. You can disable that at compile time even though most distributions will probably leave it enabled by default.

Some distros (Gentoo) have chosen to disable SysV support in systemd by default, since they historically actually did not use SysV scripts for bootup.

Posted by j at Fri Nov 19 20:09:48 2010
Sorry, I was under the impression it somehow relies on sysv. Read up on it in the meanwhile (the announcement post), please disregard.

Posted by nona at Sat Nov 20 05:31:56 2010
Can we use those password agents in early (initrd) boot?

I'm thinking cryptoroot. AFAICT, systemd isn't supposed to go into the initrd, and these new agents depend on systemd, so how is that going to work?

Posted by oiaohm at Sat Nov 20 09:39:02 2010
I am sorry but btrfs is not a replacement to Linux LVM.  Yes the LVM support should be fixed up.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_volume_management

There are cases where LVM can come into its own when you have multi distributions on the same drive.

LVM can contain all types of partitions.  btrfs downfall it's solution can only contain btrfs and cannot snapshot other partition types.  Really LVM support in Linux kernel extended to handle windows LVM would be handy.  So yes there could be a need for Multi OS installs for LVM support to work correctly.  Not something that can be just turned off by them for speed.

The NFS read only one is also critical this is handy for secure diskless remote boot terminals where you want reset to return to a clean state.

Lennart you are making the same mistake as some of the design selections with pulseaudio and alsa.  Simple fact NFS read only, LVM, RAID and so on exist in the old system so the new system need to support them or have a replacement that is better for the tasks they do.

If you want to deprecate LVM, NFS read only, RAID support please explain what there proper replacements is matching there function.  BTRFS is not a proper replacement to LVM or RAID due to its limited Filesystem type support.

Posted by Diego at Sat Nov 20 10:43:44 2010
oiaohm: Eventually Btrfs should be able to export a btrfs subvolume as a block device, so you will be able to put a Ext4 filesystem on top of it - but anyway, systemd is not unsupporting LVM, Lennart only said it will not allow to have boots without scripts.

That said, deprecating LVM is just not going to happen, LVM is really powerful and provides features (like extending a filesystem to a new disk) that users can't live without. And the installer allows to install Fedora without LVM.

Posted by Lennart at Sat Nov 20 16:43:50 2010
nona, dracut handles passwords for crypt root already quite well. I see not need to replace that by our agent logic.

oiaohm: calm down. I am not suggesting to deprecate LVM. Just remove it from the default install.

Leave a Comment:

Your Name:


Your E-mail (optional):


Comment:


As a protection against comment spam, please type the following number into the field on the right:
Secret Number Image

Please note that this is neither a support forum nor a bug tracker! Support questions or bug reports posted here will be ignored and not responded to!


It should be obvious but in case it isn't: the opinions reflected here are my own. They are not the views of my employer, or Ronald McDonald, or anyone else.

Please note that I take the liberty to delete any comments posted here that I deem inappropriate, off-topic, or insulting. And I excercise this liberty quite agressively. So yes, if you comment here, I might censor you. If you don't want to be censored your are welcome to comment on your own blog instead.


Lennart Poettering <mzoybt (at) 0pointer (dot) net>
Syndicated on Planet GNOME, Planet Fedora, planet.freedesktop.org, Planet Debian Upstream. feed RSS 0.91, RSS 2.0
Archives: 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011

Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict!   Valid CSS!