Anyway, with reasonable luck, it'll have about as long an ascendency as HALd and devfsd, as it's certainly about as popular.
Which probably proves the point that it is all quite half-backed. There are a few groups more competing with ideas which worked for them, and one wins. And after a while the house of cards falls apart, and then we start again. Instead of interested and experienced people sit together, figure out what is needed, have a look around how others make it work, come up with a good design and then start implementing. systemd is the clear result of a people and ideas excluding work style instead of inclusive cooperation.. It's "work for me and I do not care about your concerns". Gnome, btw, was not a Linux-only desktop.. I had it working on Solaris desktops more than 10 years ago. FreeBSD was going from a one file /etc/rc to /etc/rc.d and rcorder - because the developers saw the limitations, saw SysV init and took the best from it without being stuck with static /etc/rc?.d/S?? numbering. It also went from static /dev to devfs - but only once, and it looks sensible, and there is /etc/devfs.rules (and /etc/defaults/devs.rules to look for. That's it - and it seems to work (as long as you are not dealing with Gnome) Regards Peter On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 4:01 AM, Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> wrote:
Quoting Russell Coker (russell@coker.com.au):
[a great deal of energetically missing the point, snipped]
The Linux kernel is much larger than systemd and has many more interfaces to sources of hostile data.
The security problem primarily raised by systemd has very little to do with the init or its ancillary and unneccessary daemons (hostnamed, timedated, localed, logind, etc.) and utilities and a great deal more to deal with its ridiculously bloated _external_ dependencies, e.g., routing all process privilege decisions through PolKit, one of the several badly engineered, ever-changing[1] bits of Freedesktop.org codebases to which systemd ties your system operation -- pointlessly and unecessarily, as the creator of the uselessd fork (abstracted, cleaned up, and properly modularised from systemd 208) pointed out by example.
The feature creep and intrusive functionality of systemd itself is annoying and a sufficient reason to look elsewhere, but is not security related as such.
Anyway, with reasonable luck, it'll have about as long an ascendency as HALd and devfsd, as it's certainly about as popular.
[1] http://www.jwz.org/doc/cadt.html
-- Cheers, "I don't need to test my programs. Rick Moen I have an error-correcting modem." rick@linuxmafia.com -- Om I. Baud McQ! (4x80) https://thc.org/root/phun/unmaintain.html
_______________________________________________ luv-main mailing list luv-main@luv.asn.au http://lists.luv.asn.au/listinfo/luv-main