How do I get consoles unlocked with systemd?

[andrewthomas]

If I boot with upstart, then I have tty2-6
with systemd I have none.
<ctl>+<alt>+<F2..F6> yields a blank screen with a blinking underscore.
How do I enable at least one console?

[vallimar]

It should work the same, it does for me. By default it opens up 6 vt's.
Maybe something is wrong with your config/install?

[andrewthomas]

It is just a problem when booting with systemd. If I boot with init=/sbin/upstart then it is fine.

[vallimar]

First thing to try then is a reinstall of systemd.. may or may not help.

[jvillain]

This is my biggest problem with systemd. The assumption that every one is running an embedded device and nothing will ever change and break. Because of that you don't need any ability to debug or trouble shoot or rescue. Hooray if you have a smart phone. If you are a server administrator you are no longer wanted. It will be a very, very, very long time if ever before RHEL will adopt systemd.

In order to get faster boot time they don't start any virtual servers out of the box so if you didn't go in and configure at least one before your box died you are F'd. If you can get either to single user mode or can boot off of a rescue disk then you can go in and add one. Then reboot. Look at the section called "Enable shell access" in this document for more help. Really a link to this page should be stickied to the top of this forum because systemd is going to be gut wrenching to a lot of people for a long time.


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Systemd_problems

[vallimar]

Yes, it's very fragile.. if you have an unmountable location specified in /etc/fstab, I've had it
halt the bootup process and just sit there. Also, when I boot into runlevel 5, and attempts to
make any service changes.. it kills my X screen, my vt's and otherwise renders my system
unusable. Have to forcefully reset the system, how nice is that?

Then.. this is Lennart.. and we are already seeing the same quality as from his last product,
PulseAudio. Then as now, drop-in replacement is promised and not achieved. I think the guy
deserves a drop-kick to the groin.

[smr54]

Well, I dunno about that (one cringes at the thought), however, this particular person's products all seem to be solutions in search of problems. systemd is, of course, not considered production ready, but yes, at present, it seems quite fragile--there was a thread on testing on how it would just die because logging wasn't getting started.

Fedora, Ubuntu, and others aren't made for system administrators. Most of their effort is in making it so the new user can do more, as well as protecting said user from themself. Unfortunately, this makes it more difficult for the advanced user to do more.

Systems like Arch, the BSDs, the more traditional Unices, e.g., AIX, spend their development efforts, generally speaking, to allow the advanced user to do more, rather than worrying about allowing the newcomer to do more. It's not elitism per se, it's common sense. New users become advanced users or leave, and advanced users get frustrated.

[DBelton]

I totally agree that systemd isn't "quite ready for prime time" actually, in my opinion, it's not even ready for testing.

I spent hours just trying to figure out how to get my nfs service started. None of the tools to stop and start systemd services work. They just lock up the system.

And then there is the problem I have of trying to get a service started only in multi-user (old runlevel 3) but not have it start in graphical (old runlevel 5). It seems that all services you specify in multi-user get started in graphical as well.

Forget the drop kick to the groin, I have a nice big sledge hammer here to use on him instead! :D

[vallimar]

And then there is the problem I have of trying to get a service started only in multi-user (old runlevel 3) but not have it start in graphical (old runlevel 5). It seems that all services you specify in multi-user get started in graphical as well.
He decided for us that runlevels were too antiquated, so systemd ignores them.
Which annoys me also for several reasons of wanting/needing things to only run
during certain times.

[andrewthomas]

Really a link to this page should be stickied to the top of this forum because systemd is going to be gut wrenching to a lot of people for a long time.


https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_debug_Systemd_problems

Thanks for the link.

[smr54]

Another useful one

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SysVinit_to_Systemd_Cheatsheet

Whether, in the (very) long run, it may turn out to be an improvement, I know not.

[jvillain]

He decided for us that runlevels were too antiquated, so systemd ignores them.

Well yes and no. They have thrown a wrapper around systemd so a lot of the old calls will still work. That is a plus. So you can do "init 3" for example to get to the equivalent of run level 3. Run level 3 is currently a symlink to the multiuser target. But if you want you can create a tailor made run level 3 and create a symlink at /etc/systemd/default.target that will point to it and that is what it will boot to by default.

I am glad that other people are at least looking at systemd now. I have started a few threads in the past and just gotten crickets chirping.

My other major concern is trying to discover every thing that needs to start and in what order. There is systemd-gtk but what good does that do you if you are stuck in rescue mode? Systemd isn't all bad and does some useful things. But there are some things that really haven't been thought through.

The idea that systemd is great for some newby on a desktop is madness. I got my start with Linux installing slackware from floppies and having to cut code to get it to boot. And there are things about systemd that have me pulling out my hair. To think a newby will be able to figure it out if their system breaks is a stretch. What they will do is buy a Mac.

There are to many differences in the way a program runs under systemd and under init for the developers to keep both systems usable in their code for very long. They are going to have to pick one or the other. Unless some thing is done to address the concerns of people who do support then I think systemd will die off. Looking back at all the drama when systemd wasn't accepted into F14 makes me laugh now.

[smr54]

Interesting article with its section on systemd.


http://lwn.net/Articles/429597/

[rockdoctor]

I find it handy to keep upstart installed along with systemd. Have had some issues with Rawhide yesterday and earlier today where the system wouldn't boot using systemd, but worked just fine when adding
init=/sbin/upstart to the kernel line in grub.conf.

[DBelton]

Well yes and no. They have thrown a wrapper around systemd so a lot of the old calls will still work. That is a plus. So you can do "init 3" for example to get to the equivalent of run level 3. Run level 3 is currently a symlink to the multiuser target. But if you want you can create a tailor made run level 3 and create a symlink at /etc/systemd/default.target that will point to it and that is what it will boot to by default.

I am glad that other people are at least looking at systemd now. I have started a few threads in the past and just gotten crickets chirping.

My other major concern is trying to discover every thing that needs to start and in what order. There is systemd-gtk but what good does that do you if you are stuck in rescue mode? Systemd isn't all bad and does some useful things. But there are some things that really haven't been thought through.

The idea that systemd is great for some newby on a desktop is madness. I got my start with Linux installing slackware from floppies and having to cut code to get it to boot. And there are things about systemd that have me pulling out my hair. To think a newby will be able to figure it out if their system breaks is a stretch. What they will do is buy a Mac.

There are to many differences in the way a program runs under systemd and under init for the developers to keep both systems usable in their code for very long. They are going to have to pick one or the other. Unless some thing is done to address the concerns of people who do support then I think systemd will die off. Looking back at all the drama when systemd wasn't accepted into F14 makes me laugh now.

BINGO!

I too have been using linux for years, and consider myself quite computer literate. Yet I have been having quite a few problems learning things about systemd. So I agree 100% that a newbie to linux will never be able to figure systemd out.

While I do see where the system init process needed some improvement, and I do see where systemd is trying to fill that needed improvement, I think it is very hard to use and is going to end up running many people away from linux.

I don't think systemd is quite ready for wide distribution and use. Actually it could use a complete rewrite and get rid of a lot of the verbosity in using it. Have you stopped to look at how much you need to type just to start a service? LOL

[jvillain]

Have you stopped to look at how much you need to type just to start a service? LOL

I hear you. I fall back to service xyz start rather than use the proper systemctl functions for that very reason.

[vallimar]

The really, really dumb part.. it was supposed to make bootup fast.. it really isn't.
They have to resort to varying degrees of hackery just to make it as fast as upstart.
Parts of it are faster, but then there are bits were it noticeably hangs waiting on things
such that the overall effect makes no nevermind as far as speedup goes.

And lately, other than bootup, it doesn't even work for me, trying to change anything
after you've started X just hangs the system. This on top of the many, many, many
other issues it's already had.. I'm back to upstart for awhile.

[andrewthomas]

The latest systemd ( systemd-23-1.fc15.x86_64 ) fixed my console problem.