Re: Embarrassing security bug in systemd
On Friday 08 December 2017 14:26:41 Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 07:09:06PM +0100, Menelaos Maglis wrote:
> >>> > Basically, it was a completely inconsistent mess before systemd.
> >>> > Now you at least have a central place where you can configure
> >>> > your system behaviour.
> >>
> >> In the past, we had *no consistency*: inittab had one thing,
> >> display managers another, ACPI scripts another...if you wanted a
> >> specific policy, you had to change three or more separate systems.
> >>
> >> Along came [a new system] which provided a single place to define a
> >> consistent policy.
> >
> >systemd provides a single place to define a consistent policy,
> > provided your system uses systemd.
>
> That's a good point.
>
> >Debian GNU/Linux offers alternative init systems, which people choose
> >and use. They have their, often different, "default" settings.
>
> It would perhaps be a good idea for the policy to be determined in an
> init-agnostic way.o
>
> >In anycase, it should be a documented configuration option to allow
> >for alternative use cases.
>
> No objection there, and I agree that the release notes should probably
> have covered the policy changes. That ship has now sailed
> unfortunately.
So now, no effort will ever be made to fix the man pages. Hell of a way
to run a train.
Cheers, Gene Heskett
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
Reply to: