cientifico 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Github says 2.8k files when selecting c (including headers...) https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Asystemd%2Fsystemd++langua...

If the project is even split in different parts that you need to understand... already makes the point.

▲

ktm5j 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Well to be fair, you don't need to understand how SystemD is built to know how to use it. Unit files are pretty easy to wrap your head around, it took me a while to adjust but I dig it now.

To make an analogy: another part of LFS is building a compiler toolchain. You don't need to understand GCC internals to know how to do that.

▲

josephg 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Well to be fair, you don't need to understand how SystemD is built to know how to use it.

The attitude that you don't need to learn what is inside the magic black box is exactly the kind of thing LFS is pushing against. UNIX traditionally was a "worse is better" system, where its seen as better design to have a simple system that you can understand the internals of even if that simplicity leads to bugs. Simple systems that fit the needs of the users can evolve into complex systems that fit the needs of users. But you (arguably) can't start with a complex system that people don't use and get users.

If anyone hasn't read the full Worse Is Better article before, its your lucky day:

https://www.dreamsongs.com/RiseOfWorseIsBetter.html

▲

ktm5j 3 hours ago | parent [-]

LFS is full of packages that fit your description of a black box. It shows you how to compile and configure packages, but I don't remember them diving into the code internals of a single one.

I understand not wanting to shift from something that is wholly explainable to something that isn't, but it's not the end of the world.

▲

josephg an hour ago | parent [-]

No, its not the end of the world. And I agree, LFS isn't going to be the best resource for learning how a compiler works or cron or ntp. But the init process & systemd is so core to linux. I can certainly see the argument that they should be part of the "from scratch" parts.

	▲	ktm5j 21 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		You still build it from scratch (meaning you compile from source).. they don't dive into Linux code internals either. They still explain what an init system is for and how to use it.

▲

adastra22 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The whole point of LFS is to understand how the thing works.

▲

cf100clunk 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In what way was Bruce incorrect, your one link excepted?

▲

raggi 4 hours ago | parent [-]

he is counting every c file in the systemd _repository_ which houses multiple projects, libraries and daemons. he equates that to the c file count for a single init. it's a disingenuous comparison. systemd-init is a small slice of the code in the systemd repository.

	▲	cf100clunk 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm guessing he shares my belief that systemd-init cannot exist in the wild on its own, correct? When you want a teacup, you have to get the whole 12 place dinner set.