Why I (Still) Love Linux ?
45 comments
·November 25, 20250dayz
windward
It's funny how many people fall in love with the Unix philosophy because they enjoy using an OS with a macrokernel that ships with awk, tar, and find, which they operate with useless uses of cat.
shevy-java
This shows a lack of understanding. I'll skip repeating the issues with regard to systemd here, so instead on just a few points you mentioned.
- You claim that the Unix philosophy only survives to the GNUtils. Well, that shows to me a lack of understanding what the philosophy is about. Everything is a file is similar to the OOP approach of everything is an object. I recommend watching Ken Thompson when he was young here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc4ROCJYbm0
It does not capture all the UNIX philosophy but it does extend on the reasons why that philosophy works well. The philosophy is bigger than that of course but it helps serve as a counter-argument.
- The example of "writing your own script" is no different to a non-systemd system. Why would a script work or not work based on systemd? You mention as example FreeBSD debugging a shell script. Well, others use proper languages such as ruby or python. Everything that can be done via systemd I can do without it too and, in fact, have been doing so. Ruby essentially runs my system as the primary layer on everything (granted, it runs Linux, and thus mostly C, and ruby is at the end of the day a syntactic wrapper over C). I never understood why systemd would matter. I read the advertisement of the systemd devs - none of this applied to my use cases, so I never "embraced" systemd, simply because I never needed it. I did point out the increased complexity of it as a negative trade-off and this has been true til this day.
- Former "hater" also implies that criticism is not based on rationale and logic. This is not the case either. It's funny to me how the pro-systemd camp isn't really able to come up with compelling arguments on their own.
general1465
Same for me, I remember trying to configure cron to run a task periodically and it just did not budge. No error but also did not work. Systemd was working on first attempt with basic debugging when timer will be triggered again and what is the log of executed process after it has been triggered. Also manually triggering something to test if command is correct? Awesome.
shevy-java
That seems to me a complaint about cron. I always used ruby to schedule tasks instead.
One does not need cron or systemd for scheduling tasks.
travisgriggs
Like the author, I am saddened by systemd. I'm not rabidly opposed to it. I use it because Debian uses it and I like debian. And in some ways, I like the consistency better than the plethora of init script/run levels I used to have to deal with. But it does lack (to me) the Unix gestalt of having composable little pieces that could be pretty well put together and are each individually documentable and compose well in conceptual space as well. There was less surprises and nuanced side effects.
vincentkriek
As an init manager, systemd is the best thing that has happened to the wider linux ecosystem. Being able to indicate dependencies, document order and being able to let an application tell the init manager it is done and dependents of it can be started makes starting up way better.
I understand the downsides people have of systemd, but I have the feeling the huge upside is often overlooked.
shevy-java
It is more than merely an "init manager". And I disagree that it is the best thing ever - it is perfectly possible to operate linux without systemd.
> but I have the feeling the huge upside is often overlooked.
It is fine to objectively compare trade-offs. However had, it has to be a fair comparison; we can not start with "init manager" because systemd does a lot more, so how can a comparison to any software with less code be fair then? runit doesn't do much more than for initializing.
MathMonkeyMan
I've worked with init.d style init systems that had those features using special comments and sourced helper functions, but I bet if you wanted to do it all properly you'd end up with something like systemd. Or GNU Shepherd!
graemep
> As an init manager,
The objection to it is not to it as an init manager. To quote the description from the systemd site:
> systemd is a suite of basic building blocks for a Linux system
uecker
I wholeheartedly I agree with the author and you. It is sad how Linux is incrementally reshaped based on ideas which often betray the original principles that made UNIX, it derivatives, and copies great. But it is on us to create alternatives. It is free software after all.
gausswho
Great timing this article. I came to HN to escape a frustration point where this blooming script behaves differently when wrapped in a systemd service than when I run it on its own. I suspect there's some systemd punctuatory dance with a throwaway character here or there to semaphore me off to neverneverland. It's so inscrutable sometimes.
em500
Is Devuan not an option? It's explicitly advertised as Debian without systemd.
null
sidkshatriya
From the blog post:
> Even if your btrfs, after almost 18 years, still eats data in spectacular fashion.
Is this (by now) an urban legend ? Is btrfs any less reliable than, say, xfs/ext4 etc. nowadays ?
Propelloni
SUSE is using btrfs as the default filesystem in all their offerings. I think that SLES is less widespread than RHEL, but I also think those people at SUSE know what they are doing. It's not like we hear of massive data loss from SLES environments all the time.
b2ccb2
The RAID 5 and RAID 6 modes of Btrfs are fatally flawed, and should not be used for "anything but testing with throw-away data."
chao-
I used btrfs for most of the 2010's. I nearly lost some data once, and was able to recover it. Afterwards, I moved to ZFS and never looked back.
btrfs may be great now, and more power to people who use it and are happy. However, I am so used to the ergonomics of ZFS (and zed, and ZFS integrated encryption) that I don't see a reason to migrate back.
5d41402abc4b
BTRFS is fine if you use it on enterprise grade hardware, if you use it on consumer hardware expect to lose data.
zorked
No, Linux is made of legends that never die.
kiney
for features declared stable it's been an urban legend for a long time. I use BTRFS in prod since I think 2016 which was also the last year I lost data to an BTRFS Bug
alrs
Traditionally it was btrfs RAID5/6 that really sucked. I've not played with it.
XorNot
I wouldn't know I've been running ZFS for well over a decade.
63stack
Why would you not love linux? MacOS is a walled garden that keeps you from running things you wrote on the machine you own, and windows is gestures at everything. What else is there?
ekropotin
Still? Linux is better than ever!
laughing_man
I would argue it's getting better than Windows in relative terms by leaps and bounds. Mostly because Windows is getting worse, but still.
f1shy
Windows is going downhill in a hurry, while MacOS is stagnated (at best), while Linux is constantly advancing, slowly, maybe sometime the wrong path, but always moving.
DeathArrow
In what ways do you think Linux is getting better than Windows? Do you also think Linux is getting better than macOS or FreeBSD?
laughing_man
When I bought a new Windows 11 machine I foolishly copied over my data from the last machine without doing any research. It was only after I was done that I realized by default Windows copies my user directory to Microsoft's "cloud", so all my tax returns and other personal data are bouncing around Microsoft's servers somewhere. I sure hope their security is good.
By default Windows shows ads in my start menu. It also shows me ads in my notifications. I guess I could understand if it was free, but it's not.
And then there's Copilot...
arethuza
On my home desktop PC Windows 10 is saying I can't upgrade to Windows 11 and doesn't give any explanation. There's nothing wrong with the machine and I hate Windows 11 anyway (I have to use it on my work laptop) so there is no chance that I will buy a completely new PC just to run Windows 11.
So Linux has always been getting slowly better over the years (I first used it more than 30 years ago) and Windows has been getting a lot worse - so Linux easily wins.
f1shy
Linux > Windows
- Respect privacy - Is integrating better AI: no invasive AI, yet available if wanted - Usability and stability of UI and intefaces
MacOS and BSD [disclaimer: big fan of BSD] are somewhat stagnated. Depending on what you want to do, many open source projects are "linux first" what can be a problem (ask me how I know!)
cyberax
Linux kernel is just waaaaayyyyy better than Windows, at this point. Better hardware support, better stability, more features. And it keeps getting better.
Windows kernel is not _bad_, but it's developed by far fewer people.
Linux also has systemd with its unified system resource management. I can slice and dice my system as I want between containers. Oh, and containers are also awesome (Windows has them, macOS doesn't).
Desktop environments are a matter of personal taste. I like my DE very minimal: status bar, quick launcher panel, and that's it.
seba_dos1
It is better since at least 2006, otherwise I'd choose another OS to use since then, and I didn't.
draga79
For a desktop experience? Sure! For a server that needs to be supported for many years? Well...
Propelloni
That's a curious take. Today's Linux distributions are more reliable than ever with more long-term support than ever.
What changed is that you usually do not run a snowflake anymore which you carefully update to the next version in situ, but some amount of compute and storage. Today everything is blue-green and updates mean deploy, destroy behind a load balancer.
jaapz
Is this a different timeline where suddenly everything is the other way round?
kalaksi
Well what? Don't most servers run Linux? And support is good assuming you pick a distro that fits
draga79
They do. And yes, choosing a good distribution will help. But the fact that most servers run Linux isn't indicating it's the best choice. Most desktops run Windows - and this doesn't mean it's the best desktop OS :-)
stockerta
For desktop? If you not using gnome then yes.
coolThingsFirst
Even as someone who regularly gets pissed off at some issues that I kept having with Ubuntu. Linux is AMAZING. It's ridiculous that we have a fully functioning open source OS which not only works but is the basis for almost everything that runs a web server.
The experimental flavors are also insane in their creativity. Alpine linux is an entire OS in tens of megabytes. That's crazy!
mythz
It's already the best OS for development and doesn't even need to do anything to get more appealing whilst Microsoft continues to enshittify Windows 11+ and Apple turns macOS into a locked down iPad.
DeathArrow
I still think the Cathedral is a better model than the Bazaar when it comes to user facing software. For me, Linux as a server OS is great but as a desktop OS is not so great.
signa11
> ... Cathedral is a better model than the Bazaar ...
well, for the desktop possible choices from the `Cathedral` are:
- windows, and
- macos
in `Bazaar` mode, xfce has been an *excellent* choice for quite a while now, and should probably serve `Cathedral` refugees quite well.
all in all, not super convinced of the argument that you seem to be proffering here.
shevy-java
> The BSDs and the illumos distributions generally follow an approach to design and development that aligns more closely with the way I think
My impression has been that Linux is simply better than the BSDs. Now, BSD users may disagree; my point is primarily that Linux is more flexible overall. Take LFS/BLFS - you basically have extensive documention how to adjust Linux. Where is that available for BSD on an equal basis? And that is just one example of many more.
I remember in the past how NetBSD on the mailing list acknowledged that Linux runs on more computers, including the very important toasters, than NetBSD. Momentum means a lot. Top 500 supercomputers run Linux too: https://www.top500.org/statistics/details/osfam/1/
These may all be small reasons but they add up eventually.
> To give an example, I am not against systemd on principle
And it is possible to use Linux without systemd too.
Nobody wants a corporate-controlled project in Linux anyway. Where does Poettering work? ;)
> Therefore, in certain cases, the GPL becomes a double-edged sword: on one hand, it protects the software and ensures that contributions remain available. On the other, it risks creating a situation where the most "influential" player can totally direct development
But that is possible in the MIT/BSD world too. See Shopify controlling RubyCentral and thus the ruby ecosystem. Money makes the world go round. I don't think this complaint is really down to the GPL. The GPL is strict; it ensures that corporations need to open up their own modifications.
> And so yes, despite all this, I (still) love Linux.
I don't have any "love" for Linux as such. I simply think it is a good operating system. It is also a tinker-friendly operating system. I significantly prefer ruby as such; I also would not say I "love" ruby, but ruby is a very well-designed language (even ignoring the meta-influence by the shopify overlord). At the end of the day, though, these are just tools. They do things. They ideally help save time and cost. Having the same in the Windows world is not really possible, not even via WSL. WSL just makes windows suck less but windows still sucks immensely; I know because I also use windows almost daily. And I use ruby there too, which makes windows suck less, but it's not a great experience compared to linux.
> Because it has been my life companion for 30 years and has contributed significantly to putting food on the table and letting me sleep soundly. Because it allowed me to study without spending insane amounts on licenses or manuals. Because it taught me, first, to think outside the box. To be free.
> So thank you, GNU/Linux.
It's a strange summary to me. I also call Linux just Linux, without the prefaced GNU. I understand RMS; I just don't think you need to fight in an ideological way. Let the facts and advantages speak for themselves - that suffices. And pick the right licence too. But ... "life companion"? What does that even mean? And what does "to be free" even mean? You still depend on code written by other people. So you depend on those people too. It's better than depending on Microsoft, but I don't fully understand that blog entry really.
As a former hater of systemd it surprises me that people still have this disdain of systemd especially due to the so called "Unix philosophy", which in the Linux world mainly survives due to GNU writing GNUtils a rewriting of the Unix commands.
I remember embracing systemd funny enough due to when I was running alpine as my server and I had to write my own r script and boy did that quickly make me remember the awful times on freebsd debugging sh.