Systemd-homed Looks Like It Will Merged Soon For systemd 245

[k1e0x]

Yeh. With ZFS only Ubuntu kernels will be able to mount Ubuntu partitions out the boc and it's scary to see Canonical going towards something like ZFS rather than trusted in kernel tech like XFS.

Terrifying that ZFS... people only put petabytes on it and bet their business on it. : shudders :

ZFS doesn't really even compete with XFS. It competes with WAFL.

[NotMine999]

My favorite part of systemd distros is that they are all doing it wrong and using incredibly old (like days old) systemd versions.

Yep, that just about sums it up right there.

[phoenix_rizzen]

That's "systemd-ldap" buddy...

I think you mean systemd-ldapd. Although they'd probably massacre it into something like systemd-directoryd or systemd-userdbd or along those lines.

[starshipeleven]

I keep reading "was not a computer at all" and think.. oooh boy..

Yeah I was a boy when the "terminal" was little more than a screen and a keyboard with some very rudimentary circuitry that was talking to a mainfame in another room. They had no actual CPU, no processing power of their own. Older ones didn't use a screen but had a printer instead.

If you have a Unix domain, the clients can be whatever they want.. tho usually things like Solaris or Linux, windows will work in a Unix domain tho.

Ok, this moves the question then. What are these "Unix domains" and who is using them.

I know about Linux equivalents of AD using Kerberos and OpenLDAP (on RHEL and SUSE), and integrated solutions (still using the same stuff) like freeIPA https://www.freeipa.org/page/About
But afaik that's not "Unix". I never seen anything "unix" using something like AD, they all retreated to mainframes and eventually disappeared. All workstations have always been Windows or some random thin client where the OS does not matter.

Extra credit: List 4 competitors to AD.

Please. I'm the one asking questions.

[starshipeleven]

ZFS doesn't really even compete with XFS. It competes with WAFL.

West Australian Football League?

ZFS has already lost to most cluster filesystems like GLuster, Lustre, Moose/lizardfs and others, as that's where most of the SANs are placing their data now.

[phoenix_rizzen]

It isn't?

Linux ZFS is the upstream of OpenZFS now.

I mean it depends on your definition of native I guess.. I'd consider NTFS or HFS to be "non-native" despite being "in tree".

If you want portable home directories, safe encrypted backups to untrusted system and cross platform recovery options.. ZFS really is the way to do this.. Hopefully we get a nice TimeMachiene like view for snapshots for Nautilus soon.


Also I don't really understand RedHat's implementation here.. Why is the user identity file stored in the home directory?? If they want enterprise why is it on the client at all.. it feels very Microsoft esque.. Enterprise Unix client's should all be identical and have nearly no user generated configuration on them.. typically..

It was Microsoft that moved all the data to the Desktop then tried to bolt on management on top with a thousand AD acls.

I'm not sure if it qualifies as an "enterprise Unix client", but our local school district uses Linux on the desktop in all the schools.

Each school has a Linux server (currently running Debian 10), with user accounts mirrored between passwd and LDAP, all home directories on RAID10 (with a mix of XFS and ext4).

The desktops are full-fledged computers (local CPU, RAM, GPU, NIC) but no harddrives. Everything is mounted over the network using a combination of NFS and NBD. All programs run locally on the desktop, but all data is stored on the server. Desktops run Ubuntu LTS.

So, we get the best of both worlds: simplicity and ease of replacement of thin-client terminals (around $200 CAD for dual or quad-core systems, depending on the year/vendor/CPU), with all the computing/graphics power of a fat PC. Everything is stored on the server, making for easy backups, upgrades, installs, etc. Users can login to any desktop in the school, and get their full desktop experience.

Not sure how this systemd-homed would fit in with the network boot experience ...

[phoenix_rizzen]

West Australian Football League?

ZFS has already lost to most cluster filesystems like GLuster, Lustre, Moose/lizardfs and others, as that's where most of the SANs are placing their data now.

Doesn't ZFS run at a layer below Glustre? I'm pretty sure I've seen mention of a project or two using Glustre for the clustering, with ZFS underneath on each node for storage? Or is it the other way around, building a ZFS pool on top of Glustre distributed storage?

[k1e0x]

Ok, this moves the question then. What are these "Unix domains" and who is using them.

I know about Linux equivalents of AD using Kerberos and OpenLDAP (on RHEL and SUSE), and integrated solutions (still using the same stuff) like freeIPA https://www.freeipa.org/page/About
But afaik that's not "Unix". I never seen anything "unix" using something like AD, they all retreated to mainframes and eventually disappeared. All workstations have always been Windows or some random thin client where the OS does not matter.

Wow... "Has never seen a Unix work environment" ...And yet somehow you're a proponent of Linux and know how to best implement it? How does that work?

The only model you know is Windows so you recommended imitating it with Linux and when people like me come around that voice that Linux is becoming more and more Windows like and less Unix like, you get uptset by that and tell me I'm wrong because it's the only thing you've ever known.

This is what I'm talking about Starship.. over and over and over again post after post.. and I end up saying... "you don't know what you are talking about. You don't understand." ..and I know the reason now. You've never seen it.

Sun, IBM and Novel all had domain services for Unix (Solaris, IRIX, or AIX) workstations. The largest competitor to AD was Novel Netware. (that actually still exists under SuSE) In modern days, macOS is the Unix workstation.

[some_canuck]

Hopefully we get a nice TimeMachiene like view for snapshots for Nautilus soon.

there is one if you port it from openindiana's gnome2

[starshipeleven]

Doesn't ZFS run at a layer below Glustre? I'm pretty sure I've seen mention of a project or two using Glustre for the clustering, with ZFS underneath on each node for storage? Or is it the other way around, building a ZFS pool on top of Glustre distributed storage?

Yes but at that point you are not using most of ZFS features and you could just as well run btrfs or anything else as the cluster filesystem has its own checksums anyway.