ITT: People of tech who you hope suffer a career threatening and potentially life threatening injury or disease

ITT: People of tech who you hope suffer a career threatening and potentially life threatening injury or disease.

Other urls found in this thread:

people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2016/CVE-2016-10156.html
people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2017/CVE-2017-9445.html
people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2017/CVE-2017-15908.html
without-systemd.org
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

First off, systemd is not an init system, it has an init system as part of the systemd suite. systemd is a project to build a standardised lowlevel userland for Linux. The project is pretty comprehensive and it delivers a lot of functionality under one umbrella. It does away with a lot of older, often undermaintained software packages, which were traditionally used to assemble a low level userland.

Which is where the contention comes from, as a system suite systemd is restrictive for Unix virtuosi who are used to tailor a system with wit, ingenuity, a lick and a prayer and a couple dozen of unrelated packages. systemd makes such knowledge useless.

The faction that thinks that systemd is Linux's Hiroshima, finds all the added functionality bloat, unnecessary and dangerous, as it is all under development in one project.

All the systemd jokes stem from the comprehensiveness as a low level system suite. People against it love to joke that one day systemd will write its own kernel.

There is a lot of FUD and hate going around. Some arguments do have merit, a lot of eggs in one basket is certainly true, but as with all things in life, it depends which tradeoff you prefer. Do you want a suite of well designed software, working closely together, so that system management is streamlined or do you want the complete freedom to tailor your own low level system with a lot of time tested, interchangeable components.

I have no desire to be a low level system designer, so I prefer systemd. I don't hate traditional init systems though. If a Linux system has one and I need to work with it, I'm still happy it boots and starts the necessary services.

I'd like to interject for a second that I co-made linux

Where to start?

Most people of the user base didn't want SystemD in the first place. It would be a huge understatement to claim that the devellopers really didn't care about the community.

It's one thing if Linus runs the Kernel as "benevolent dictator for life". It's his Kernel, he made it. He didn't piggybacked on someone else's success, sneaked his own mini-os into it by salami tactics. SystemD takes more and more control of Linux every month. It's ingrained so deep that you have to let go of a lot of functionality - long story short, it's becoming the new linux kernel in the long run, so to say.

Why is this a problem? Because we let a very small community make decisions for the majority of people. A community led by people who have presented them selves as people with huge egos in the past and obviously and don't care about the majority of users at all. And because it's turning Linux slowly but inevitably into Windows. Instead of configurable scripts it takes control from the admins and moves it into binaries and relies on complex and poorly documented configurations. Linux is a complex, but generally well understood eco-system. If you look at something like Slackware you can still see that it doesn't take a degree in math to know your system.


Meanwhile SystemD provides a huge attack surface. It's code is now over one million LOC, and that's not comparable to the kernel where most LOC are mere drivers and such things. As a consequence people know much less what's really goig on. The system is moving through a series of interim states because everything is on PID1 for no good reason.

Every now and then a HUGE security flaw pops up which can be exploited by alomst trivial things. Some examples:
>people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2016/CVE-2016-10156.html
>people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2017/CVE-2017-9445.html
>people.canonical.com/~ubuntu-security/cve/2017/CVE-2017-15908.html

Nice pasta.

Actually I just wrote it down now. You wouldn't believe how many times I've had this discussion.

Every "entrepreneur" who comes up with services, gets popular, then sells it to google, verizon, etc and for it to close down deserves to be beheaded.

That would be 80% of all entrepreneurs.
Not saying you're wrong.

So what's the most popular linux distro without systemd?

Gentoo

Difficult to measure because truly free operating systems don't phone home until you tell them to. There are estimates by websites logging client OSes but this is in no way accurate.

Probably Slackware, Devuan, Gentoo, MX or Knoppix..?

Install Gentoo.

As a really rough metric maybe the size of the support forums for the distro?

preach, brotha

debian still allows you to remove systemd at and after install (I hope). For now.
see without-systemd.org for instructions
there's supposedly also ways to install it without systemd (or systemd being active), if you google round
For now is the key word - many things continued working under systemd "for now", and then support was dropped at a later stage.
For example boot readahead. The changelog containing "systemd devs all have laptops with SSDs". Make your own conclusions.

Yeah but it's a pasta now

>"systemd devs all have laptops with SSDs"

Yup, that pretty much sums it up.

That's the SystemD spirit:
Embrace, extend, and exterminate.

Please correct the typos, then.

Linux is a kernel, developed by Linus Torvalds.

thread closed
not a bug

fucken saved

On the other hand, Google can rapidly develop the same product and cause people run away from yours to their.

I wouldn't mind if the cishet white male who runs AMD and his KKK minions died in a bus crash

The moment that happens Intel will rise their prices by 200%.

Zuckerberg, but ten years ago.

>i don't know anything about the uefi specification but i have this image which proves i am an expert

>t. not poettering

>i am too stupid to realize my flaw and retardation, therefore my only way of coping is to use ad-hominems
It is safe to assume that you have zero knowledge about anything you're talking about. You are pathetic and should be glad that this is anonymous because the embarrassment of being exposed like this in real life would probably make you burst. It wouldn't be a loss.

>calling me out for using ad-hominems
>resorting to name-calling

OwO

This thread is off-topic, please delete it

Top kek m8

>well designed software
>working closely together
pick one

>Everything is on PID 1
Opinion discarded

The owners and founders of Amazon, Uber, Google, Applel, Facebook, Oracle, SAP etc.

everyone

The easiest way for you to raise some red flags and realize something might not be quite right is to compare the process of replacement.

* All previous init systems - So easy to replace systemd came in and did it almost overnight
* Systemd - So impossible to replace it is like a literal blackhole sucking in distros that don't want to use it but are forced to do so (even the distros that are still holding out like Gentoo are having a tough time, they have to fork their own software at times and still think it might be impossible to avoid in the future)

So ok, you might just think because it's so much better that it's harder to replace? But that's not really true. The most common argument in favor of systemd is basically "meh, it's here and I don't notice it, just like I didn't notice the other init systems either so whatever I guess"
Why should you be concerned with this sort of thing? Well what happens one day when the tables are turned and systemd is old and crusty. Will we be able to say the same thing? That we can just replace it overnight with something new? There is no way.

So, Systemd owes its very existence to the incredible modularity of "the unix way" that it is now trying to tell us all isn't important and that we can just get rid of it.

Even Poettering himself says that systemd is NOT just an init system. It's a complete rework of what PID 1 can (or *should* if you ask Poettering) do. The result is unnecessarily swallowing up tons of software that already worked just fine just to have it all be subsumed under systemd because they can. This kind of software engineering should have no place here, it does not enable me to customize my system further, it restricts what I can do, it's not transparent, it's unnecessarily bloated (It even includes Xorg code, do you think PID 1 should have desktop code?)
the list goes on user.

People want you to believe it's a meme but sometimes an idea being widespread just means it's a reality, not a meme.

>impossible to replace

>t. lennart

Let me rephrase:
PID1 could have been totally minimal, it could simply launch a PID2 process which does all the work, but no.

Anyone with a YouTube account

Pretty much this.

The Problems with SystemD are not always obvious. But it's technical debts will blowback hard in a few years.

Maybe that's how it's supposed to be. Let the big crisis come and then let's have a new start and all use LiLo.

You don't even need to use all of systemd. It's fucking modular.
Just installed Debian here and the installer fucked up and didn't properly create the timesyncd user. I just disabled the service and installed ntp. It's that simple.