systemd Rolling Out "run0" As sudo Alternative

[skeevy420]

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...

So D-bus/GNU/Linux

We're describing a combination of D-Bus, various XDG standards, update alternatives and package management, etc while being rigid in regards to backing things like Pipewire and Wayland. I don't know how else to say this, but Linux has so much freedom that it can hinder it and no major distribution is willing to become the kind of rigid I'm describing. Even the more rigid ones like Fedora still offer 42 Spins and Flavors while letting the user install things some of the Fedora maintainers would rather not support or bother with like the Plasma X11 session. That's why I've always had the pipe dream that Oracle could do something with Solaris. Nowadays, I'm starting to wonder if it won't be Microsoft that creates the rigid desktop Linux OS that attracts developers and users like how Google did it with Android and ChromeOS with mobile form factors and TVs.

Ironically, objectively, I've been describing RHEL, GNOME, and systemd. Sucks for me that they aren't making a product that I like

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.

That's what I've heard, too. I can't give an honest answer one way or the other, though.

[BesiegedAce]

How far will this go?
systemd/GNU/Linux

Clearly not far enough

[access]

[...] Myself and a friend have had to replace systemd-resolvd several times because it simply does not work with VPNs properly.

Heh, that's the most powerful feature of systemd-resolved for me that you can have per interface DNS-servers/domain and get sane lookups when remoting in to e.g. work. I currently have 3 active VPN connections with separate domains and DNS servers and everything works beautifully together with my local DNS server.

[muncrief]

Having started using Linux a few years after it first appeared, albeit just as a fun hobby, I found systemd to be a godsend.

I remember all those years dealing with run levels and incredibly convoluted init systems, and at times it was absolutely maddening. But now everything I need to do is incredibly easy, and I've rarely had a systemd related issue.

I understand that it's not perfect, and for many the fact that it violates the KISS philosophy will always render it unacceptable, but my goodness, I would never want to go back to the old days of hand woven init systems. The fact is that the init system is complicated, but systemd hides most of that complexity behind a standardized, easy to configure, user interface.

However I also hope the older init systems will always remain available, as I know there are quite a few users who really like them and will never give them up.

[BesiegedAce]

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

As opposed to... what?

[NotMine999]

...and? That's exactly what the majority of users wants. Back when Debian first adopted systemd, they had a vote on it and about two years later they re-evaluated their decision. The result both times was that people want systemd. If you want to do something else than everyone around you, that's always work. If SysV Init was still a thing - and thank the gods that abomination is finally dying out - it would be a same thing. Just that you had many dependencies on many wildly different and incompatible approaches for everything. So quit whining and just use what everyone's using or do the work of building something on your own.

So by that logic those users should have NEVER LEFT the Windows and Apple ecosystems and polluted the Wonderful World of Linux where FREE CHOICE reigned in pre-systemdeath days.

To distill the comments and diatribes that I find in this thread it comes down to this:

system(death) obviously and clearly breaks the fundamental rule of UNIX where many small programs work together, each specializing in their own unique tasks, to solve problems much greater than themselves. UNIX-style users could clearly swap out different small programs with other similar programs, albeit with different names (but a symlink can solve that), and for whatever reason they wanted; that's the essence of FREE CHOICE in UNIX and Linux.

Yes, users can still compile and build what they want out of system(death) and a few posters have clearly stated that certain distros tightly integrate system(death) into many aspects of that distro. At least Gentoo took a more rational approach when it came to system(death) that still allows a large amount of user choice, for example (borrowing from a poster here) systemd-boot or grub or whatever. system(death) would be acceptable to many if it and it's sycophant distros functioned on a level that allows FREE CHOICE, but they do not; they cater the the "I don't wanna Windoze or Fruit Cult crowd but I needs me a 'puter so I'z can play mez games on kewl Linux."

Where traditional UNIX-oriented distros have lost "mindshare" is in failing to improve integration among non-systemd components so they work well together. Distros claim "lack of developer hours", "lack of maintainer hours", "lack of funding" or whatever while pushing it all back to the priginal program developers (who have similar challenges). That is the "opening" that the systemd leaders spotted, how they wedged themselves into the Linux World ... and now like the roaches that they are we will never be rid of the system(death) infestation.

[bosslog]

The red background when running commands as root seems like a great addition to sudo. Creating another systemd-whatever for it, not so...

[Agno]

The red background when running commands as root seems like a great addition to sudo. Creating another systemd-whatever for it, not so...

The tool is also a lot more fun to use than sudo. For example, by default it will tint your terminal background in a reddish tone while you are operating with elevated privileges. That is supposed to act as a friendly reminder that you haven't given up the privileges yet, and marks the output of all commands that ran with privileges appropriately

Definitely! It will be a killer-feature. I personally change the PS1 env.var. of every server where I can in order to have different colors in different environments. I knew people that working with many ssh shells open have executed the right command on the wrong machine.

[bosslog]

I knew people that working with many ssh shells open have executed the right command on the wrong machine.

One such unfortunate example was GitLab.

[Agno]

With regards to systemd my felling and humble opinion is that there a lot of variations in a complex landscape. Some parts of it are annoyingly intertwined, other are kinda independent. Some parts are awesome, solved real problems, provided good features; some other parts try to solve real problems but pushing a solution that benefit only specific use-case that the developer has in mind; some other parts are sadly very crappy and I personally don't get why they exist.

For example I like the systemd init core daemon. It has solved problems, brought consistency, added features, made things easier. I like systemd homed/homectl, I think it's a good idea and has still some hidden potential. Two small pieces of software very modular are for example systemd stub and ukify (I've never compiled them but the work completly standalone from everything else, like if UNIX philosophy was still alive). Homed/homectl I understand the problem but I don't like the solution. A example of system component that I really don't like and are also awfully connected are the aforementioned system network and resolved: at my current workplace we are asked to use debian-based distros (most chosen are debian itselt, ubuntu and pop_os), since a few years they started shipping resolved, it caused lots of problem, it sadly is a broken software, and even the interfaces are a weird design IMHO.

Also, systemd developer's are known for their superiority complex and stubbornness, feature creep of systemd will never stop.

Still I think there is too much anger towards systemd and systemd developer. They are people. And they develop free and open source-source software for everyone that wants it. Systemd was adopted because it solved problems or provided values. I don't like some of their works and I lost many hours trying to solve systemd-resolved issues before trashing it. I don't know why distributions ships it. But everyone that develops free software has their own primary goal/use-cases in mind for their own software.