Love the sinner, hate the sin

nob...@nowhere.com

unread,

Jun 7, 2023, 5:47:30 AM6/7/23

to

Do I hate systemd?

Or do I hate the guy who decided that instead of running at a sensible
time via a simple crontab entry, the mdadm check service should be
started and stopped by the systemd timer at a random interval (that
might be the middle of the working day), and that this be implemented by
calls in *two* places - both of which are largely undocumented?

I know... Ill hate *both* of them! Yay!

nob...@nowhere.com

unread,

Jun 7, 2023, 6:13:01 AM6/7/23

to

On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 10:47:48 +0100, nob...@nowhere.com wrote:

>Do I hate systemd?

Let me put it this way: I think that "is systemd shit" should be added
to that lystte of "is X Y" things alongside the pope being catholic or
bears shitting in the woods.

>Or do I hate the guy who decided that instead of running at a sensible
>time via a simple crontab entry, the mdadm check service should be
>started and stopped by the systemd timer at a random interval (that
>might be the middle of the working day), and that this be implemented by
>calls in *two* places - both of which are largely undocumented?

Or do I hate the defenderz, who claim that systemd is great and anyone
who doesnt like it "can fuck off to BSD"? Because systemd "answers a
question" - even if the question is "how do I make Linux look more like
Winblows at the system level?"

>I know... Ill hate *both* of them! Yay!

You know, I learned something today!

Actually, no I didnt. Theres nothing new here. systemd sucks precisely
*because* it ends up with dumb shit like this happening when people
really should know better.

Im starting to sympathise with that sterotypical nerd who thought that
"idiots" leaving Debian was a good thing - except that the idiots in
this case are devs who cant resist the lure of oohshinium.

Message has been deleted

auuV

unread,

Jun 11, 2023, 5:43:32 PM6/11/23

to

Its all a bit whoosh for me at the present moment, but am I right in
thinking that it will become relevant on my next Unix system?

auuV

unread,

Jun 11, 2023, 5:45:40 PM6/11/23

to

On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 10:47:48 +0100, nob...@nowhere.com wrote:

That sounds mad!

Having been thisclose to system disaster due to lack of time and being
familiar with unwanted messages popping up and having to be dealt with
or dismissed, I can all too easily envisage scenarios where this
service check could cause huge trouble.

nob...@nowhere.com

unread,

Jun 19, 2023, 6:18:00 AM6/19/23

to

On Sun, 11 Jun 2023 22:45:40 +0100, auuV <au...@zehen.invalid> wrote:

>On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 10:47:48 +0100, nob...@nowhere.com wrote:
>
>>Do I hate systemd?
>>
>>Or do I hate the guy who decided that instead of running at a sensible
>>time via a simple crontab entry, the mdadm check service should be
>>started and stopped by the systemd timer at a random interval (that
>>might be the middle of the working day), and that this be implemented by
>>calls in *two* places - both of which are largely undocumented?
>
>That sounds mad!

I cant figure out why someone would do that. Heres what Ive been able
to come up with so far:

* systemd can finally replace cron now.
* it adds a (NEW! SHINY!) feature to vary the start time by a random
amount. (this can actually be useful; for example if hitting a network
resource, so that the server doesnt get 100,000,000 separate requests
all at exactly the same time.)
* somebody decides to migrate the mdadm check service to it.
* they decide to use the (NEW!) feature, because SHINY!
* and lo, it was so.

Its that decision that is the truly questionable part there. What
problem were you trying to ameliorate, by introducing this change with
no thought whatsoever about the impact it might have?

(Its the insidious creeping takeover of everything by systemd that is
the truly Sinister part. But then we all knew that.)

>Having been thisclose to system disaster due to lack of time and being
>familiar with unwanted messages popping up and having to be dealt with
>or dismissed, I can all too easily envisage scenarios where this
>service check could cause huge trouble.

Praps the Yvahk people were jealous of the whole "cant deflect asteroid
because Winblows is doing an update" thing?

nob...@nowhere.com

unread,

Jun 19, 2023, 6:19:43 AM6/19/23

to

"Relevant" is one word. "Impossible to avoid" and "like Pinochets
junta" are others.

auuV

unread,

Jun 24, 2023, 7:46:35 PM6/24/23

to

On Mon, 19 Jun 2023 11:17:57 +0100, nob...@nowhere.com wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Jun 2023 22:45:40 +0100, auuV <au...@zehen.invalid> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 07 Jun 2023 10:47:48 +0100, nob...@nowhere.com wrote:
>>
>>>Do I hate systemd?
>>>
>>>Or do I hate the guy who decided that instead of running at a sensible
>>>time via a simple crontab entry, the mdadm check service should be
>>>started and stopped by the systemd timer at a random interval (that
>>>might be the middle of the working day), and that this be implemented by
>>>calls in *two* places - both of which are largely undocumented?
>>
>>That sounds mad!
>
>I cant figure out why someone would do that. Heres what Ive been able
>to come up with so far:
>
>* systemd can finally replace cron now.
>* it adds a (NEW! SHINY!) feature to vary the start time by a random
>amount. (this can actually be useful; for example if hitting a network
>resource, so that the server doesnt get 100,000,000 separate requests
>all at exactly the same time.)
>* somebody decides to migrate the mdadm check service to it.
>* they decide to use the (NEW!) feature, because SHINY!
>* and lo, it was so.
>
>Its that decision that is the truly questionable part there. What
>problem were you trying to ameliorate, by introducing this change with
>no thought whatsoever about the impact it might have?

Do they write these things up?

>(Its the insidious creeping takeover of everything by systemd that is
>the truly Sinister part. But then we all knew that.)
>
>>Having been thisclose to system disaster due to lack of time and being
>>familiar with unwanted messages popping up and having to be dealt with
>>or dismissed, I can all too easily envisage scenarios where this
>>service check could cause huge trouble.
>
>Praps the Yvahk people were jealous of the whole "cant deflect asteroid
>because Winblows is doing an update" thing?

Perish the very thought! That couldnt have happened, could it?

auuV

unread,

Jun 24, 2023, 7:47:08 PM6/24/23

to

OK, forewarned is four-armed, I guess.

nob...@nowhere.com

unread,

Jun 30, 2023, 12:46:12 PM6/30/23

to

Sign up now for the Red Shat helicopter tours! Linux devs welcome!
:DDDdd

nob...@nowhere.com

unread,

Jun 30, 2023, 12:50:33 PM6/30/23

unread,

Sep 19, 2023, 7:53:20 PM9/19/23

to

Indeed - although was Kryten meant to be unlikeable? Or is it just
Rimmer that you are referring to?

>Illegal under the _All Nazis Must Be Punched No Exceptions_ Act?

For whatever definition, yes.

unread,

Nov 7, 2023, 7:12:55 PM11/7/23

to

Misclaimer: it has been difficult for me to find anything to add to
this good summary - I dont like to do a lazy "well said".

Also, I didn't watch all that much Red Dwarf, it seems. Looking at
Wikipedia, I watched the first couple of series and remember some but
not all episodes up to Series V. I certainly saw _Quarantine_ and
_Back to Reality_. Think I gave up on Series VI although I remember
seeing enough to dislike that they only had Starbug. Also around this
time I was working later, I reckon.

>I dont think Kryten was meant to be unlikable as such, but he was
>clearly corrupted by being cooped up with three aggressively lazy losers
>for years. It even became an occasional plot point ("Its an errrrr-").

Fair enough. I had taken a liking to him and evidently stayed loyal
to that in the face of his behaviour.

>Rimmer was truly obnoxious, though sometimes sympathetic. And sometimes
>not. The writing was all over the place on that, but the creators would
>deflect that objection with "rule of funny".

I found him obnoxious and really didnt have the moments of sympathy
you might expect from my general character. Good actor, I guess!

>Lister was supposed to be sympathetic, kind of, but it was constantly
>and sometimes unsubtly pointed out how any sane roommate would have
>murdered him within 24 hours. He could also be a complete cunt on
>occasions, and it was only because Rimmer was a bigger cunt that he got
>away with it. And sometimes not even then.

True, but see Kryten - I took a liking to him, found him human and
vulnerable underneath it all, making the best of a horrible situation.

>Cat was merely shallow. In the early episodes, to the point of
>sometimes being dangerously callous - but they quickly toned that down a
>lot once the character became popular.

Cat was very popular with me and my mum right from the start, the
shallowness was funny (hes a cat, after all) and I didnt mind when he
started developing.

Is this a case of me watching a different production because Im not
focussing on the right/intended things? I am beginning to suspect
this. Your insights are telling me what I missed by watching in
auuV-mode. I told you this was difficult to answer.

>So all of them were unlikable in their own way. You would hate to have
>to spend any time at all with any of them (*possibly* excepting Kryten).
>But they still somehow managed to seem charming, because comedy amirite.

Yes, comedy and unrealistic fantasy comedy at that. The more unreal
the better, I think. Didnt like Back to Reality at all. Just like I
disliked Star Trek episodes set on 20th Century Earth.

>>>Illegal under the _All Nazis Must Be Punched No Exceptions_ Act?
>>
>>For whatever definition, yes.
>
>Definition indeed. By far the scariest part of that Act is how
>scrupulously careful it is to avoid nailing down precisely what this
>apparently fluid and nebulous concept of "Nazi" actually entails.

Never a truer thought. :|

nob...@nowhere.com

unread,

Nov 15, 2023, 9:47:42 AM11/15/23

to

Good in some ways. He always seemed to play more or less the same
character though, albeit with varying degrees of sympathy.

On more than one occasion, Rimmer seemed genuinely vulnerable and simply
got mocked for it. The writers no doubt thought that belitting someone
in a moment of weakness - or as we toxic males call it, "bantz" - was a
good example of rule of funny. But imagine actually being cooped up
with three people for *decades* and they all continue to act like
obnoxious bullying louts without ever growing or even reaching out in
any way. It would be like watching _Top Gear_, except you cant switch
it off.

Thats the biggest issue I have with _RD_. Every time it looks like some
actual character development might happen, they throw it away for the
sake of a cheap gag. Which might even then still be forgivable, if the
gags were all funny. But increasingly, when these are no longer four
20-somethings but four 50-somethings, it is less funny and more cringe.

TL;DR: in _OFaH_ you poign with them. In _RD_ you poign at them.

>>Lister was supposed to be sympathetic, kind of, but it was constantly
>>and sometimes unsubtly pointed out how any sane roommate would have
>>murdered him within 24 hours. He could also be a complete cunt on
>>occasions, and it was only because Rimmer was a bigger cunt that he got
>>away with it. And sometimes not even then.
>
>True, but see Kryten - I took a liking to him, found him human and
>vulnerable underneath it all, making the best of a horrible situation.

He was every bit as obnoxious as Rimmer, in his own way. Im not sure if
that was the point, or if you just werent supposed to notice it.

>>Cat was merely shallow. In the early episodes, to the point of
>>sometimes being dangerously callous - but they quickly toned that down a
>>lot once the character became popular.
>
>Cat was very popular with me and my mum right from the start, the
>shallowness was funny (hes a cat, after all) and I didnt mind when he
>started developing.
>
>Is this a case of me watching a different production because Im not
>focussing on the right/intended things? I am beginning to suspect
>this. Your insights are telling me what I missed by watching in
>auuV-mode. I told you this was difficult to answer.

Its entirely possible. There were no real story arcs or character
development, and even by sitcom standards it has a notoriously slapdash
approach to continuity. So its hard to analyse in any meaningful way.

Praps Im just asking too much. It *was* a funny show. (Though very
much with diminshing returns, especially after half the creation team
quit. :)

>>So all of them were unlikable in their own way. You would hate to have
>>to spend any time at all with any of them (*possibly* excepting Kryten).
>>But they still somehow managed to seem charming, because comedy amirite.
>
>Yes, comedy and unrealistic fantasy comedy at that. The more unreal
>the better, I think. Didnt like Back to Reality at all.

Really? I thought that was one of the best ever episodes. In context,
of course: the idea has by now been flogged to death. But it was still
relatively novel in 1992.

> Just like I
>disliked Star Trek episodes set on 20th Century Earth.

Well, we all disliked those.

At the risk of starting a world wide flame war, I think the whole idea
of introducing time travel into the _ST_ universe was a huge mistake.

auuV

unread,

Nov 23, 2023, 3:34:00 PM11/23/23

to

I didnt see enough to form a broad opinion. Did not like Brittas
Empire one little bit.

Was just reading this morning that Charles and Barrie acknowledge that
particularly in the early days they did not get on with each other. It
is probably well known by everyone else but me.

>
>On more than one occasion, Rimmer seemed genuinely vulnerable and simply
>got mocked for it. The writers no doubt thought that belitting someone
>in a moment of weakness - or as we toxic males call it, "bantz" - was a
>good example of rule of funny. But imagine actually being cooped up
>with three people for *decades* and they all continue to act like
>obnoxious bullying louts without ever growing or even reaching out in
>any way. It would be like watching _Top Gear_, except you cant switch
>it off.

It would be Hell. I can remember some long-ago work colleages who
were very hard to put up with because of their humour or mannerisms.
Fortunately, all office things come to an end - or at least a
reorganisation.

Forgive me, I am not well and still a bit delirious. Regerts for not
having been able to do the rest of the replies on this thread last
week, befor I had to repair to the Princess Anne fainting couch.

>Thats the biggest issue I have with _RD_. Every time it looks like some
>actual character development might happen, they throw it away for the
>sake of a cheap gag. Which might even then still be forgivable, if the
>gags were all funny. But increasingly, when these are no longer four
>20-somethings but four 50-somethings, it is less funny and more cringe.

Definitely. I saw an episode of a later series and it was tragic. And

cringe.

>TL;DR: in _OFaH_ you poign with them.

<clunk!>

>In _RD_ you poign at them.

Astute.

>>>Lister was supposed to be sympathetic, kind of, but it was constantly
>>>and sometimes unsubtly pointed out how any sane roommate would have
>>>murdered him within 24 hours. He could also be a complete cunt on
>>>occasions, and it was only because Rimmer was a bigger cunt that he got
>>>away with it. And sometimes not even then.
>>
>>True, but see Kryten - I took a liking to him, found him human and
>>vulnerable underneath it all, making the best of a horrible situation.
>
>He was every bit as obnoxious as Rimmer, in his own way. Im not sure if
>that was the point, or if you just werent supposed to notice it.

I dont think I did. He was pompous and shallow, but, you know,
polite.

>>>Cat was merely shallow. In the early episodes, to the point of
>>>sometimes being dangerously callous - but they quickly toned that down a
>>>lot once the character became popular.
>>
>>Cat was very popular with me and my mum right from the start, the
>>shallowness was funny (hes a cat, after all) and I didnt mind when he
>>started developing.
>>
>>Is this a case of me watching a different production because Im not
>>focussing on the right/intended things? I am beginning to suspect
>>this. Your insights are telling me what I missed by watching in
>>auuV-mode. I told you this was difficult to answer.
>
>Its entirely possible. There were no real story arcs or character
>development, and even by sitcom standards it has a notoriously slapdash
>approach to continuity. So its hard to analyse in any meaningful way.

What I remember of it now is mostly just episodic situations.

>Praps Im just asking too much. It *was* a funny show. (Though very
>much with diminshing returns, especially after half the creation team
>quit. :)

>>>So all of them were unlikable in their own way. You would hate to have
>>>to spend any time at all with any of them (*possibly* excepting Kryten).
>>>But they still somehow managed to seem charming, because comedy amirite.
>>
>>Yes, comedy and unrealistic fantasy comedy at that. The more unreal
>>the better, I think. Didnt like Back to Reality at all.
>
>Really? I thought that was one of the best ever episodes. In context,
>of course: the idea has by now been flogged to death. But it was still
>relatively novel in 1992.

Maybe I should revisit it in the right spirit.

>> Just like I
>>disliked Star Trek episodes set on 20th Century Earth.
>
>Well, we all disliked those.

Yes.

>At the risk of starting a world wide flame war, I think the whole idea
>of introducing time travel into the _ST_ universe was a huge mistake.

It looked like money saving to me.