Systemd 241 Being Prepared With "System Down" Security Fixes

[Murple]

I really shouldn't rise to all this 'anyone who is skeptical of systemd is a idiot mouthbreather' but here goes anyway...

Init scripts were a mess? Sure. Systemd provides better security when it comes to service management? Yep it sure does.

Did I need or want a new tool for managing my logs? No. But I have systemd so now I have journald. I can't remove it, I can't disable it. I can stop it from writing logs but all messages are routed through journald even if I set up old school syslogs.

I like systemd for managing my services. Do I mind the existence systemd tools for sessions, network, mounts,booting etc? Of course not. Do I mind that I cant fucking choose to use what I fucking want? Yes.

[cl333r]

Damn, Rust is more disgusting than I thought.

lol I hate it sometimes too and for a good reason.

[bug77]

For Rust, in the usual case of a "for element in collection {...}" style loop, the compiler can omit the bounds check entirely (since it's the compiler that is generating the code to do the index/pointer manipulation, not the programmer).

Yes, but the Rust compiler can infer things because of ownership. C/C++ doesn't have ownership, thus the compiler can't make the same assumptions
I read the Rust docs and, while I'm no expert in either Rust or C, I didn't find anything particularly hideous in there.

[Murple]

why the fuck do you want to choose about them? the job of a operating systemd is realiebale manage your hardware and bring you in a defined state and not about choose everything when that means others have way more work and need to implement fragile solutions beause you may choose whatever arbitary tool which end fragile because nobody tests what you could use for arbitary reasons in endless possible combinations

that's the job of the distribution and what Linux needed many years ago was standardization instead feel like a newbie when you switch between Redhat, Debian and SuSE because everyhting is completly different for no sane reasons and "i want to choose" isn't one

where i have and want to have choice is for the stuff running omn top of the operating system but hell not for every peice before the operating system shows me the first cursor, i want get the systemd as quick, secure and stable to that point and then doing what i told it to do

This is where you and I differ. I do want the choice over how my OS works. That may make me a geek, a loser, a person very much in the minority, but that's just my bag I guess. I don't buy your argument that allowing me choice makes other people have more work. This is why distros exist so you can cater for the masses. I don't even expect people to make solutions for me. I just don't want arbitrary road blocks put in place that force me into all or nothing choices. Let me make my own dumb choices rather than telling me what's good for me. If I wanted that I'd just run windows.

[Murple]

... when it comes to different distributions everybody is free to write drop-in-replacements for as example systemd-logind ...

drop in replacements that are compatible with... systemd *facepalm*

[Murple]

troll somewhere else!
here you go: https://devuan.org/
and if it don't survive deal with it

the majority which does the maintainance work is using whatever they think does the job best and if nobody wants to maintain a distribution you like for free maintain your own - it's that easy - after 7 years systemd in production i am tired of all the fools and before i go back to upstart/sysvinit i commit suicide

I'd like to remind you that it was you that brought up 'systemd haters', provoking me to speak up. I'm not interested in devuan. Upstart is dead and I haven't once said that init scripts are the way to go. A compiled init system making use of cgroups and namespaces (as you like to go on about) is a really good idea. Shock horror other inits exist that achieve this. I *do* maintain my own shit, my only bugbear is it gets harder the more systemd positions itself as indispensable. E.g I can't use gnome anymore. Its kind of a moot point bcos I don't use GNOME but its just an example. If having a different opinion to you is trolling then so be it.

[waxhead]

Bollocks. You keep around references to a boxed representation, check once, and use optimized safe operations that validate with the size field.

Nonsense, if you want to keep an array (which actually is a set of bytes) safe in memory you might as well compute the length + a checksum. Don't forget that a off by one bug is after all a bug. A size field could just a easily be set to the wrong value or even partly overwritten. Show me the assembly code between a non-bounds check vs a bounds checked version of a insert into an array and then we're talking!

[NotMine999]

I really shouldn't rise to all this 'anyone who is skeptical of systemd is a idiot mouthbreather' but here goes anyway...

Init scripts were a mess? Sure. Systemd provides better security when it comes to service management? Yep it sure does.

Did I need or want a new tool for managing my logs? No. But I have systemd so now I have journald. I can't remove it, I can't disable it. I can stop it from writing logs but all messages are routed through journald even if I set up old school syslogs.

I like systemd for managing my services. Do I mind the existence systemd tools for sessions, network, mounts,booting etc? Of course not. Do I mind that I cant fucking choose to use what I fucking want? Yes.

To add to your comments here....

SystemD can be customized to a great extent, but the trick is finding out how to preserve your customized changes over various updates to SystemD by those devs/maintainers and by devs/maintainers that distribute SystemD "units".

Once you learn how those "overrides" work and where they are all stored (IMHO "scattered about" in some cases), then you have yet another "technically superior script mess" (thanks to hreindl for that wonderful quote) that you get to maintain all by yourself.

Oh the joys of using Linux with SystemD....

[Murple]

do your homework and get the facts right!

Lennart himself provided a patch for GNOME to keep compatibility with ConsoleKit which was rejected by the GNOME developers

So GNOME doesn't work without SystemD (thanks for correcting me on how to write it proper, *now* i'm trolling).
That's exactly what I said. It doesn't matter if GNOME developers are at fault, the end result is the same.

Anyway dude you are *really* angry at "fools" for not joining in your fanatical circle jerk and you are very rude with all your RTFM bollocks. I can use systemd as well as the next person. Yes functionality does change/break and the documentation is historically poor but I manage fine. I just wish I didn't have to use it, which is just my subjective preference.

[arokh]

Murple

You're failing to bring up valid arguments against systemd, just like every other anti-systemd guy through the years. That GNOME has made systemd a requirement has nothing to do with systemd. Just really hard to take you guys seriously, go use a distro that doesn't use systemd, create your own distro or whatever. Fork GNOME and implement support for your idiotic idea of an init system. Problem solved.