alt Hacker NewsTotal n00b here. My first linux install was pretty recently, in late 1996 or early 1997 (sometime that winter).
I just don't get it. Like is the core sentiment "How dare they address obvious system shortcomings"? Is it "I learned once and how dare you think I'm capable of learning again"? Is it "I want others to suffer the way I did to learn job scheduling"?
cron did a job, but had shortcomings. Systemd addresses many of those shortcomings. One day something else will come along and address the shortcomings of systemd, and no one will care about systemd nostolgia. This is how technology is supposed to work: making progress and fixing the shortcomings of the past generation. It's not a religion, we don't have to maintain the weird old ways from the 80's, your soul won't be saved by cron or corrupted by systemd.
Replies
I am not agreeing with egorfine. Indeed, why not improve what we can improve?
> cron did a job, but had shortcomings. Systemd addresses many of those shortcomings
Right, but what are those "many" shortcomings? The article lists four, and fully half of them seem to be nonsense, per my comment. (time spec syntax appears to be equally complex in systemd timers, and I have no idea what they mean about PATH, as it seems equal too)
The remaining two are fairly good points, kind of. Sending mail is a black hole until you look there, sure. Believing that emails get meaningfully delivered on a non-email server is very anachronistic. But isn't logging a black hole until you look there too?
So from the article that leaves "Execution history is difficult to follow and interrogate", which I super agree with. I would argue it's not inherent to cron, and one could have written a small tool that allows following and interrogating.
And… surely that goes for logging too? cron does log to syslog, right?
Maybe there's some integration with other stuff that is better, that I'm not aware of?
I'm not disputing that it's better. I'm sure it is. But where's that list? If it's literally only the `list-timers` command, then that's very underwhelming. Is it the randomness to scheduling? I've never needed it (I just spread them out over an hour by fixed start time), but sure that would have value in other cases where coordination is not possible. You could add it to cron, but not in a nice way.
To me it seems like engineers do what engineers like to do: enjoy greenfield implementations. It's open source. Nobody's going to ding your quarterly performance evaluation for going off on a amusement coding session without a requirements doc. I know that I have written a lot of tooling for amusement and to work the way I want it to work. I certainly understand the engineering mind that would rather write something from scratch than understand the previous system.
I don't mind learning new things, but this article seems to fawn over stuff you can do in systemd timers, where… yeah that was always an option (in cron). I don't have faith that the article writer actually knew cron before they trash it in favor of something else.
On a tangent, I do agree with egorfine that Lennartware inherently has a disdain for users and their workloads (e.g. kills user processes inside a screen/tmux arbitrarily), and that audio on linux was set back 5-10 years just from the mere disastrously bad quality of the pulseaudio implementation. It makes sense that he works for Microsoft.
> How dare they address obvious system shortcomings
I'm all for it.
However the trust in systemd brand and its leader is deeply negative, so anything that comes from systemd folks is an immediate no.
Yeah, I certainly have my complaints about systemd but the parent's point is undermined by the fact that cron still works. If you prefer it, carry on I doubt seriously it's going anywhere. I still do sometimes.