systemd Rolling Out "run0" As sudo Alternative

[EphemeralEft]

I wonder why? The only death threats I ever got were from queer activists because I cautioned them about their aggressive tone and tactics and stated that people like me get estranged by this.

For what it's worth, I'm gay but I don't think most people would consider me to be extreme or aggressive. I just do gay things in addition to arguing with strangers about FOSS.

[mrg666]

Run0 is a great addition to systemd. I prefer systemd and use it on both Ubuntu and Fedora. I am glad SysVinit is left in the ancient history.

[EphemeralEft]

[ basic criticism is, that systemd is binaries, while some predecessors are scripts utilizing more basic system tools, that are under strong review(?) ]

For the record, SUID on Linux only works with binaries, even if you add the SUID bit to a script. So `sudo` and any similar tools will be just as auditable as `run0`.

[andyprough]

If doas could do exactly everything sudo does with no drawbacks it would have replaced sudo a long time ago. Nothing you need to "educate yourself" about, common sense and logik is everything you need.

You don't want to do everything sudo does, that's the beauty of doas, you avoid many of the security issues. You are showing your lack of basic knowledge again.

[L_A_G]

systemd is actually extremely modular; pretty much every service can be replaced or disabled.

No. This is just patently false and the back and forth hard dependencies between systemD packages have been well documented for years at this point. You not personally running into this issue is textbook "runs fine on my machine" denialism and ignorant at best, flat out dishonest at worst.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't know and do you a favor and save you the effort of looking this up.

There. Now you know better.

[RAINFIRE]

BTW, please come to the Fediverse/Mastodon, Phoronix!
And I don’t mean Mastodon•social because many instances are already blocking them for bad moderation.

You mean the censors don't like that they don't censor enough? The Fediverse is filled with censorship and those who like it.

[DumbFsck]

So if systemd needs to be broken up. Then how? And why was it not designed in a more modular fashion to begin with?

I agree withTskeevy420
The breaking up of systemD, for it to work, would have to be like Wayland, a set of protocols and extensions, so each implementation has to still be the same in the way they communicate with each other.


Oh, wait, we just described D-bus...



Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe you can, right now, write software to replace any single part of systemD, all you have to do is correctly interface with what you don't want to rewrite via D-Bus.

[ATLief]

No. This is just patently false and the back and forth hard dependencies between systemD packages have been well documented for years at this point. You not personally running into this issue is textbook "runs fine on my machine" denialism and ignorant at best, flat out dishonest at worst.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you didn't know and do you a favor and save you the effort of looking this up.

There. Now you know better.

Based on your link it seems your criticism is about other projects unconditionally depending on systemd, rather than something about systemd itself. In that case, you should be criticizing those other projects, not systemd.

[Daktyl198]

systemd is vendor lock-in at this point

You can't opt-out of most features unless you compile it yourself

Packages are gradually starting to depend on functionality of systemd

We no longer have the freedom of choice as they're pushing more and more features into a single point of failure.. XZ vulnerability depended on functionality of systemd (edit: for those missing the bigger point, such problems are a biproduct of feature creep. Also, let's not discuss how buggy core components are, like systemd-networkd & systemd-resolved, and how many attack vectors systemd introduces with the amount of modules they provide).

How far will this go?
systemd/GNU/Linux

Gradually? Gnome has depended on systemd functionality basically since the start. It's one of the main reasons that systemd is literally everywhere now, because GDM required a feature that only systemd had (at the time, before somebody made an alternative. By then it was too late).

I'm fine with systemd as an init system. It works well enough, and people are used to it by now. What I don't like is the forcing of all of it's other completely unrelated modules on us, especially when they're simply worse than things that already exist most of the time. Myself and a friend have had to replace systemd-resolvd several times because it simply does not work with VPNs properly.

[RealNC]

So do things the proper way first before you ask how to do something the proper way, that's simply not supposed to be a thing.

Well, it should be a thing. The actually proper way to do this is getting asked for the root password if a program tries to access something that requires root permission. And it shouldn't be up to the program itself to implement that. The OS should be doing that.

Before some programs (mainly text editors) started implementing this by hand, how did you deal with it? How were you editing files for example in /etc? If you can't "sudo" your text editor because Gtk refuses to run as root or whatever, then what?

IMO, the "proper" way you describe kind of sucks.