Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Systemd 210 Already Has Many Changes Piled Up

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,651

    Default Systemd 210 Already Has Many Changes Piled Up

    Phoronix: Systemd 210 Already Has Many Changes Piled Up

    It looks like the next release of systemd is already imminent after the major systemd 209 update...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTYxMzY

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Systemd 210 Already Has Many Changes Piled Up
    Thatís why many of those Debian clowns are against it: systemd, unlike Debian, has not a glacial development speed!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    457

    Default

    The AppArmor addition. Is that a Canonical thing? Would be cool.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Vilnius, Lithuania
    Posts
    2,541

    Default

    SI prefixes for throughput? I always have SI prefixes for everything. The IEC prefixes are largely pointless in this day and age (the only place they still make sense is for RAM amounts). And at that they should be written with "i", instead of "32K" have "32Ki" if you want to mean multiples of 1024.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Bulgaria for now
    Posts
    140

    Default

    And just to make it hard for the trolls to pretend they've got facts on their side:

    - systemd-networkd is no longer statically enabled, but uses the usual [Install] sections so that it can be enabled/disabled using systemctl. It still is enabled by default however.
    In other words: behaves exactly like any other service, but still enabled by default unless a distro changes it during packaging.
    Last edited by psychoticmeow; 02-24-2014 at 05:00 PM. Reason: NFI why I quoted GreatEmerald

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rexilion View Post
    The AppArmor addition. Is that a Canonical thing? Would be cool.
    AppArmor is not really a Canonical thing. It was developed by Immunix/Novel and integrated into a OpenSuSE/SLES. But they migrated to SELinux AFAIK, so Canonical maintains AppArmor.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    527

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by michal View Post
    AppArmor is not really a Canonical thing. It was developed by Immunix/Novel and integrated into a OpenSuSE/SLES. But they migrated to SELinux AFAIK, so Canonical maintains AppArmor.
    OpenSUSE still uses apparmor, as do Mageia and friends. It is by far the most popular MAC.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zanny View Post
    OpenSUSE still uses apparmor,
    So from my POV it's a bit surprising that Canonical maintains it. The only reasonable explenation for it is that Novel doesn't thread it as important and they don't really care about it's support.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    457

    Default

    I really like SystemD on how you enable and disable processes but I feel the JournalCtl is lacking, or not dishing up. I feel fault finding is more difficult on SystemD setups than other mechanisms. These comments may not be founded but that's the impression I'm getting without proper research.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    9

    Default MSEC

    Quote Originally Posted by zanny View Post
    OpenSUSE still uses apparmor, as do Mageia and friends.
    Magiea uses MSEC which was developed by Mandriva a few years ago. AppArmor is not even in the Mageia repositories.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •