Re: systemd effectively mandatory now due to GNOME
> * it is buggy. I did install a straightforward install of experimental
> GNOME to test if it improved even a bit, running systemd as init, and, with
> 2G RAM assigned to the machine, I got an OOM from one of systemd's
> components. Excuse me for not looking more closely but purging the machine
> and running away screaming: even in early stages of integration, an init
> system which even *can* possibly OOM is not fit for any non-toy use.
>
> * it breaks other users of cgroups. I have not tested this personally
> (mostly because of the above point), but if I understand it right, it takes
> over the whole cgroups system, requiring anything that runs on the same
> kernel instance to beg it via dbus to perform required actions. This might
> be possible to organize on a single system, but not really between multiple
> systems on the same kernel. Even if you run massive Rube Goldberg tricks
> (akin to those once needed for dbus inside a chroot), this is still doable
> only if you run the same version both in host and guests. And I for one
> heavily use vservers, which are supposed to be replaced with lxc. Not being
> able to run an arbitrary, possibly old[2], distribution in a guest -- or even
> being able to move a live system into a container, without replacing its
> init system, means it's a no-no for me.
* CVE 2013-4327 - Towards a world where even simple systems and
firewalls are vulnerable!
p.s. CVE-2013-4392, CVE-2013-4391 and I think I've missed out the really
bad one to do with remote connection.
--
_______________________________________________________________________
'Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work
together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a
universal interface'
(Doug McIlroy)
In Other Words - Don't design like polkit or systemd
_______________________________________________________________________
Reply to: