Re: Embarrassing security bug in systemd
tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> Now watch all the old skoolers dashing out of their little caves and
> waving their fists at something which could be read as a provocation
> (I'm myself one of those, just look a bit upthread :)
>
It is not about old or new, but about known and unknown. Unkown exposes me
to risk. As also highlighted here the solution is not the best on multiuser
environment, but I think one could configure systemd to respect the
requirements.
I first accepted systemd also advocated for "progress", but after a long
discussion here (at least 6months ago) I revisited my opinion and installed
sysvinit first on the server and then on the desktop, notebook etc.
> In the sense of civilized discourse, I now do a bit of introspection
> and think one could read Michael's statement differently. For those
> using the computers "classically", there was no mess. Issue su at
> any console (most of us did the migration to sudo a while ago, since
> it's more convenient and a tad safer), done. No mess.
>
This is true and I think we'll find time to learn systemd and get
comfortable with that.
> But for a desktop environment, which has been silently permeated
> by the assumption "one computer -- one user -- one display/keyboard"
> and which wants to offer their users transparent access to system
> management tasks (install printer, package system, video resolution,
> yadda yadda) in a way that looks somewhat like Those Other Operating
> Systems, the implementations we have seen are a mess, all this
> Gnome *kit horror and whatever KDE does (there's enough mess still
> left: why have Gnome and KDE to invent their own virtual file
> systems? Have you ever had a look at what Gnome does to attach
> emblems to files? And so on).
>
This is also true - gnome went insane and KDE unusable as of v4.
> So I understand perfectly that those desktop environments have
> clinged desperately to systemd. They are constantly on the brink
> of breaking down under their own complexity, so exporting some
> of it to Some Other Place always feels like a bit of fresh air.
>
> So in this context, I'd say Michael is spot on.
>
> Now if you don't buy into that desktop thing, systemd doesn't
> look like a simplification or sorting out some mess, I'd think.
> But some agree to differ on that too.
For me personally systemd is very new and I need to find time to understand
it and be able to manage it.
Reply to: