Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #156977 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-08-28 17:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-08-30 15:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 126 — 27 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
Another system management tool to disappear. Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-08-28 17:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. claude juif <claude.juif@gmail.com> - 2015-08-28 17:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 13:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. claude juif <claude.juif@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 13:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 14:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 21:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2015-08-28 18:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-28 18:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Chris Bannister <cbannister@slingshot.co.nz> - 2015-08-29 01:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 12:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-08-29 15:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 15:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-08-29 16:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2015-08-29 16:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 16:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2015-08-29 17:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-08-29 16:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 16:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-08-30 02:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 10:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 14:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 15:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-08-30 14:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-08-30 10:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2015-08-29 15:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> - 2015-08-29 16:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-08-28 23:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 00:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2015-08-30 17:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-08-30 17:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2015-08-30 20:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-08-30 21:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 21:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> - 2015-08-30 21:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-08-30 21:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 22:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2015-08-31 00:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 06:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 12:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 22:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 16:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 20:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. "T. J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 22:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 17:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-02 17:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2015-09-03 11:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-08-31 14:30 +0200
Re: systemd-logind emitting messages to the terminal upon login Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-08-31 17:50 +0200
Re: systemd-logind emitting messages to the terminal upon login The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-08-31 18:10 +0200
Re: systemd-logind emitting messages to the terminal upon login Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-09-01 03:00 +0200
Re: systemd-logind emitting messages to the terminal upon login The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-01 05:30 +0200
Re: systemd-logind emitting messages to the terminal upon login Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2015-09-01 11:40 +0200
Re: systemd-logind emitting messages to the terminal upon login The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-01 15:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2015-08-31 19:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-01 15:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Michael Biebl <biebl@debian.org> - 2015-09-01 15:50 +0200
Re: systemd-logind emitting messages to the terminal upon login The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-01 16:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2015-09-01 21:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2015-09-03 11:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2015-09-05 06:00 +0200
Re: uselessd Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-08-31 17:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2015-08-30 23:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-08-31 09:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-08-31 14:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-08-31 14:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 18:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2015-08-31 17:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-08-31 17:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 17:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2015-08-31 18:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 19:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2015-08-31 20:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 20:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> - 2015-08-31 20:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 20:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 21:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2015-08-31 18:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 19:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2015-08-31 19:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 19:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2015-08-31 19:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 20:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Charlie Kravetz <cjk@teamcharliesangels.com> - 2015-08-31 21:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org> - 2015-08-31 21:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Seeker <seeker5528@comcast.net> - 2015-09-02 10:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 12:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Seeker <seeker5528@comcast.net> - 2015-09-03 07:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 08:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2015-09-03 16:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiatipy.org> - 2015-09-02 12:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2015-09-02 12:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2015-09-03 17:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Eike Lantzsch <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2015-09-03 18:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2015-09-03 19:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Eike Lantzsch <zp6cge@gmx.net> - 2015-09-03 21:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2015-09-03 21:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2015-09-03 22:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Seeker <seeker5528@comcast.net> - 2015-09-03 08:30 +0200
Re: How to exit /bin/sh Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-08-31 23:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Christian Seiler <christian@iwakd.de> - 2015-08-31 18:40 +0200
Re: "su is really a broken concept" Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-09-01 02:50 +0200
Re: "su is really a broken concept" "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 03:00 +0200
Re: "su is really a broken concept" Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-09-03 01:20 +0200
Re: "su is really a broken concept" "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 10:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2015-08-31 20:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> - 2015-08-31 21:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-09-01 13:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-01 15:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-09-01 16:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-01 16:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2015-09-01 16:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-09-01 18:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 04:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 15:40 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 16:30 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 02:20 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-09-03 05:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> - 2015-09-03 05:40 +0200
Re: No-one working on 'su' has stated that they will stop. Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-08-31 18:30 +0200
Re: No-one working on 'su' has stated that they will stop. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 07:50 +0200
Can malware qualify as free software? Jonathan de Boyne Pollard <J.deBoynePollard-newsgroups@NTLWorld.com> - 2015-08-31 17:50 +0200
Re: Can malware qualify as free software? The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> - 2015-08-31 17:50 +0200
Re: Can malware qualify as free software? Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> - 2015-08-31 18:50 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> - 2015-09-03 10:10 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Ric Moore <wayward4now@gmail.com> - 2015-08-29 03:00 +0200
Re: Another system management tool to disappear. Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> - 2015-08-30 15:10 +0200
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
| From | Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 14:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q39Kx-hX-7@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157111 |
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 5:47 PM, Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:30:58 -0400
> Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> wrote:
>
>> On Saturday 29 August 2015 10:39:07 Reco wrote:
>>
>> > Hi.
>> >
>> > On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 09:49:55 -0400
>> >
>> > Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> wrote:
>> > > > > If su goes away, IMNSHO, it will be such a PITA that it will
>> > > > > encourage far more people to just give up and run their machines
>> > > > > as root full time. And I don't believe for a millisecond that
>> > > > > is the effect intended.
>> > > >
>> > > > They provide some systemd-specific kludge instead of su. So it's
>> > > > not that bad.
>> > >
>> > > I don't recall recognizing that being discussed yet.
>> >
>> > Please read the bugreport. It's all there.
>> >
>> > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/825
>> >
>> > > > And, given the current systemd adoption rate in Debian, I'd say
>> > > > that we, stable users, have 3-4 years before that "machinectl
>> > > > login" thing will be available to us.
>> > > >
>> > > > > So, if su goes away, how do I accomplish those tasks in a
>> > > > > suitable manner that will not bore a hole in the user sandbox?
>> > > >
>> > > > If it comes to this (i.e 'su' will go away) - I just use busybox
>> > > > (which has perfectly working implementation of su without the
>> > > > fancy bits). I.e.
>> > > >
>> > > > busybox su -
>> > >
>> > > Command not found. Wheezy 32 bit install.
>> >
>> > Obviously for this command to work it's required to install busybox.
>> > I'd recommend busybox-static package.
>> >
>> > Reco
>>
>> Installed it, suid problems:
>>
>> gene@coyote:~$ busybox su amanda
>> su: must be suid to work properly
>> gene@coyote:~$ busybox su -
>> su: must be suid to work properly
>>
>> Is it still finding the system su first?
>
> No. The 'problem' is exactly what it tolds. Meaning:
>
> 1) "Original" su is suid root-owned binary:
>
> $ ls -la /bin/su
> -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 40168 Nov 21 2014 /bin/su
>
> 2) Busybox, on the other hand - is not:
>
> $ ls -la /bin/busybox
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1837008 Feb 19 2015 /bin/busybox
>
>
> So, *root*-invoked "busybox su" should behave exactly like original
> "su". Everyone other than root are told to get lost.
>
> Note that:
>
> 1) Setting suid bit on busybox is *extremely* bad idea. Don't do it
> ever do it (as busybox provides *much* more than su).
>
> 2) Your way of using su you've described should not be affected by this
> little inconvinience as you become root first, and do su second.
Being curious, myself, about this question, I did a web search on
"suid busybox" and found this interesting tidbit:
http://www.softforge.de/bb/suid.html
which refers one compile-time configuration, and to a convenient
configuration file:
/etc/busybox.conf
I would assume that, if you have installed busybox, you would have man
pages that explain this, as well. But I don't have a debian system
booted to check, at the moment, sorry. After a search on the web,
maybe it is not easy to find in the man pages, after all.
I must say, my personal impression of busybox has always been that I
would rather simply have enough persistent storage to have a proper
userland -- that it would be indicated only on embedded stuff where
flash RAM and other persistent storage is extremely limited for some
reason or other.
Curt seems to be using it in other ways -- which might be interesting
to hear more about?
--
Joel Rees
Be careful when you look at conspiracy.
Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well:
http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/10/conspiracy-theories.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 15:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3ang-11w-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157117 |
Hi. On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 21:16:32 +0900 Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> wrote: <skip> > >> Installed it, suid problems: > >> > >> gene@coyote:~$ busybox su amanda > >> su: must be suid to work properly > >> gene@coyote:~$ busybox su - > >> su: must be suid to work properly > >> > >> Is it still finding the system su first? > > > > No. The 'problem' is exactly what it tolds. Meaning: > > > > 1) "Original" su is suid root-owned binary: > > > > $ ls -la /bin/su > > -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 40168 Nov 21 2014 /bin/su > > > > 2) Busybox, on the other hand - is not: > > > > $ ls -la /bin/busybox > > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1837008 Feb 19 2015 /bin/busybox > > > > > > So, *root*-invoked "busybox su" should behave exactly like original > > "su". Everyone other than root are told to get lost. > > > > Note that: > > > > 1) Setting suid bit on busybox is *extremely* bad idea. Don't do it > > ever do it (as busybox provides *much* more than su). > >> > Being curious, myself, about this question, I did a web search on > "suid busybox" and found this interesting tidbit: > > http://www.softforge.de/bb/suid.html > > which refers one compile-time configuration, and to a convenient > configuration file: > > /etc/busybox.conf Wow. Thank you very much, I was not aware about this. > I would assume that, if you have installed busybox, you would have man > pages that explain this, as well. Actually, no. busybox(1) does not mention anything about busybox.conf or CONFIG_FEATURE_SUID_CONFIG. > But I don't have a debian system > booted to check, at the moment, sorry. After a search on the web, > maybe it is not easy to find in the man pages, after all. The easy way here is to check busybox-static compile options, which belong to debian/config/pkg/static file in this archive: http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/b/busybox/busybox_1.20.0-7.debian.tar.gz And, CONFIG_FEATURE_SUID_CONFIG is there indeed, with the value of "y". A quick test (wheezy x86-64, just in case): # cat > /etc/busybox.conf << EOF [SUID] su = ssx root.0 EOF # chmod 600 /etc/busybox.conf # chmod 4755 /bin/busybox # su - user $ busybox cat /etc/shadow cat: can't open '/etc/shadow': Permission denied $ busybox su - Password: Of course Debian-way implementation would require something like dpkg-statoverride, but it's a small price to pay. > I must say, my personal impression of busybox has always been that I > would rather simply have enough persistent storage to have a proper > userland -- that it would be indicated only on embedded stuff where > flash RAM and other persistent storage is extremely limited for some > reason or other. To my big surprise, sometimes busybox provides a sane behavior, while coreutils provide buggy one. An example is #765514 (note that they managed to put buggy coreutils 8.23-3 in jessie). And, bugs aside, busybox-static can be put in initrd, which is invaluable for those crash-recovery scenarios. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 14:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q39Kx-hX-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157111 |
On Sunday 30 August 2015 04:47:10 Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 20:30:58 -0400 > > Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> wrote: > > On Saturday 29 August 2015 10:39:07 Reco wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > > > On Sat, 29 Aug 2015 09:49:55 -0400 > > > > > > Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> wrote: > > > > > > If su goes away, IMNSHO, it will be such a PITA that it will > > > > > > encourage far more people to just give up and run their > > > > > > machines as root full time. And I don't believe for a > > > > > > millisecond that is the effect intended. > > > > > > > > > > They provide some systemd-specific kludge instead of su. So > > > > > it's not that bad. > > > > > > > > I don't recall recognizing that being discussed yet. > > > > > > Please read the bugreport. It's all there. > > > > > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/825 > > > > > > > > And, given the current systemd adoption rate in Debian, I'd > > > > > say that we, stable users, have 3-4 years before that > > > > > "machinectl login" thing will be available to us. > > > > > > > > > > > So, if su goes away, how do I accomplish those tasks in a > > > > > > suitable manner that will not bore a hole in the user > > > > > > sandbox? > > > > > > > > > > If it comes to this (i.e 'su' will go away) - I just use > > > > > busybox (which has perfectly working implementation of su > > > > > without the fancy bits). I.e. > > > > > > > > > > busybox su - > > > > > > > > Command not found. Wheezy 32 bit install. > > > > > > Obviously for this command to work it's required to install > > > busybox. I'd recommend busybox-static package. > > > > > > Reco > > > > Installed it, suid problems: > > > > gene@coyote:~$ busybox su amanda > > su: must be suid to work properly > > gene@coyote:~$ busybox su - > > su: must be suid to work properly > > > > Is it still finding the system su first? > > No. The 'problem' is exactly what it tolds. Meaning: > > 1) "Original" su is suid root-owned binary: > > $ ls -la /bin/su > -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 40168 Nov 21 2014 /bin/su > > 2) Busybox, on the other hand - is not: > > $ ls -la /bin/busybox > -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1837008 Feb 19 2015 /bin/busybox > > > So, *root*-invoked "busybox su" should behave exactly like original > "su". Everyone other than root are told to get lost. > > Note that: > > 1) Setting suid bit on busybox is *extremely* bad idea. Don't do it > ever do it (as busybox provides *much* more than su). > > 2) Your way of using su you've described should not be affected by > this little inconvinience as you become root first, and do su second. > > Reco So to me, nothing changes. Thats good IMO. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | <tomas@tuxteam.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 10:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q36tk-3Tg-23@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157086 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Aug 29, 2015 at 08:30:58PM -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: [...] > Installed it, suid problems: > > gene@coyote:~$ busybox su amanda > su: must be suid to work properly > gene@coyote:~$ busybox su - > su: must be suid to work properly > > Is it still finding the system su first? No: It's telling you that it can't honour your request unless the executable has the setuid bit set. This is the magic by which all of this works, anyway. This is easy to achieve (chmod u+s /bin/busybox). BUT you should stop for a minute and think of the consequences. If busybox has a vulnerability, then anyone capable of invoking it can achieve root. Pick your poison :-) - -- t -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlXiwY4ACgkQBcgs9XrR2kaV2ACcDOWyczzXhZLvCcvw6JroncI6 6Z4An3Nt+HgAMHmRjuccBtK7Z3VLguwC =+3BQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-29 15:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q2Owp-3ef-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157037 |
On Sat 29 Aug 2015 at 08:55:00 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: [Snip] > So, if su goes away, how do I accomplish those tasks in a suitable > manner that will not bore a hole in the user sandbox? su is not going away. Please take no notice of the misinformation being spread in the first post and read https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/825
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Heskett <gheskett@wdtv.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-29 16:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q2PiO-4pe-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157039 |
On Saturday 29 August 2015 09:29:47 Brian wrote: > On Sat 29 Aug 2015 at 08:55:00 -0400, Gene Heskett wrote: > > [Snip] > > > So, if su goes away, how do I accomplish those tasks in a suitable > > manner that will not bore a hole in the user sandbox? > > su is not going away. Please take no notice of the misinformation > being spread in the first post and read > > https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/825 Well, if it did, I wonder how long it will be before someone replaces all that typing with a script named su? There are far more ways to skin that cat than the cats supposedly nine lives can account for. That is not written in jest. I have automated quite a few of the daily ditch digging tasks on this machine so that when something see's a trigger, there's a bash script, launched as a daemon, waiting to handle it, all in the background, often without making me even aware of it. It just gets done. That is after all, one of the things computers should be good at, so I use the heck out of its ability to save me keystrokes or button clicks. For instance, to reply to this mail which showed up already sorted to the correct "folder" as if by magic, all I have to do is click the correct reply button. And click on send, or ctl+return when I am done. Litterally everything else is done for me by scripts that tie mailfilter and fetchmail, feeding procmail, which in turn checks that mail with spamassassin, clamscan & feeds the survivors to /var/spool/mail/$user. The closing of that file triggers another script that tells kmail to go get the new mail from that local inbox. So kmail doesn't go to sleep for 30 seconds while I am in the middle of typing a reply, a fraction of a second is all. Whats not to like? Another "furinstance". I have a 30 yo computer setup in the basement that I yet do software development on in the wintertime. I run a java app that hooks it up to this machine, so I can have a file here that looks like a whole drive to that machine, up to 100's of them in fact. Or if I want to print a listing of some of my assembly language scribblings, the printer driver in its os has been swapped out for one that uses one of the channels this java app, called drivewire has, so I "list filename >/p", and this machine does all the work, spitting out that listing at 19 pages a minute on a small Brother laser printer that actually lives on the desk that computer is sitting on. All tied together with a loooong USB cable, and done automatically and 20x faster by this machine. Also much easier to read than the old dot matrix printers that machine once drove. That is what computers are supposed to do. So I have no qualms about making them do it. It gives me more time to be creative in other ways. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lisi Reisz <lisi.reisz@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-28 23:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q2zH3-7az-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #156977 |
On Friday 28 August 2015 16:16:11 Renaud OLGIATI wrote: > Systemd-Linux to get rid of su: > > https://tlhp.cf/lennart-poettering-su/ > > Is this a trend to make _all_ the GNU-Linux tools disappear, and have > _everything_ incorporated into systemd ? How come that Lennart Poettering is so powerful/important? "He's just this guy." But he says something will/must happen, and we all jump to. :-? Lisi
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-29 00:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q2AD8-8vL-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157002 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 08/28/2015 04:45 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: > On Friday 28 August 2015 16:16:11 Renaud OLGIATI wrote: >> Systemd-Linux to get rid of su: >> >> https://tlhp.cf/lennart-poettering-su/ >> >> Is this a trend to make _all_ the GNU-Linux tools disappear, and have >> _everything_ incorporated into systemd ? > How come that Lennart Poettering is so powerful/important? "He's just this > guy." > > But he says something will/must happen, and we all jump to. :-? > > Lisi > He isn't, Lisi. =) If I might offer an opinion at the risk of feeding the trolls, some people just have a bad reaction to systemd in general, claiming that it is "absorbing" everything in sight. This is not entirely inaccurate, but it is certainly not true either. Reality is, as always, somewhere in the middle. People have made many claims about systemd's "monolithic design" that I find rather odd, when they have no problem with the Linux kernel for using the same techniques: linking binary modules. They had to find someone to blame for the "systemd problem", so they selected Lennart Poettering because he is the one of the team who helped create systemd. He is also a most vocal critic of traditional UNIX, which makes him the easiest target. The reality of the situation is that "su" is part of the POSIX standard, period. The POSIX standard keeps the various UNIXs: Linux, FreeBSD, etc compatible enough to share code. No matter what Mr. Poettering thinks or does, or even if systemd offers an alternative - "su" is not going anywhere. That is the reason that "su" is installed on Debian by default, even if you use "sudo." T.J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 17:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3cp4-497-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157006 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 29/08/2015 8:49 AM, T.J. Duchene wrote: <snip rubbish> Lennart is the /main/ reason systemd exists; vocal or not. The linux kernel is bloated, it shouldn't be as large IMHO either. It too goes against the "*NIX" way.... Read Lennart's own blog, you'll see that he is "in the business" of making Linux his own; thus my coined phrase "Lennart's Linux". I want no part of Lennart Linux and I don't want ANY feature creep to lessen my freedom of choice for any essential component on my systems. Once you take in systemd, you are going to get to the stage that it will be necessary whether you like it or not. And ANYONE whom speaks against systemd is, quite simply, just like one who utters the name Voldermort in the Harry Potter story. Both are just as evil, but one is purely fictional. Kind Regards AndrewM -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iF4EAREIAAYFAlXjGooACgkQqBZry7fv4vuT+gEAsMhRA4r2kxXAKRXFIwyBgB76 jx0zF5WQzwQPYQ2Jg98A/iFC1cqvD8+irElZ3llsB2194FnU/WMrxofbboNV2K2W =qEN/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 17:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3cIq-4vu-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157125 |
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 01:00:27 +1000
Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> wrote:
> And ANYONE whom speaks against systemd is, quite simply, just like one
> who utters the name Voldermort in the Harry Potter story. Both are
> just as evil, but one is purely fictional.
With due respect, m'lud, it is not he who is evil, who dares utter the name of
He Who Must Not Be Named.
HWMNBN, and his followers, are another matter...
Cheers,
Ron.
--
C'est bien plus beau lorsque c'est inutile.
-- Edmond Rostand
-- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 20:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3fGj-jN-33@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157126 |
On 31/08/2015 1:24 AM, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: > On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 01:00:27 +1000 > Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> wrote: > >> And ANYONE whom speaks against systemd is, quite simply, just like one >> who utters the name Voldermort in the Harry Potter story. Both are >> just as evil, but one is purely fictional. > > With due respect, m'lud, it is not he who is evil, who dares utter the name of > He Who Must Not Be Named. > > HWMNBN, and his followers, are another matter... Yes, of course, that is what I actually meant ;-) - that's the fictional one [HWMNBN]. - systemd is the non-fictional one Just to be clear... both of those evil. The person whom speaks up against systemd is typically [and most certainly erroneously] considered a troll. We are allowed to have an opinion, even though expressing it is demonized by the pro systemd crowd. Cheers A.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 21:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3g9j-17i-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157130 |
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 04:35:46 +1000
Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> wrote:
> The person whom speaks up against systemd is typically [and most
> certainly erroneously] considered a troll. We are allowed to have an
> opinion, even though expressing it is demonized by the pro systemd crowd.
Common phenomenon: It is well documented that the recently converted are
the most rabid defenders of their newly-found faith; even though it may be of
recent creation (For reference, see Scientology)
Cheers,
Ron.
--
Luck, that's when preparation and opportunity meet.
-- P.E. Trudeau
-- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 21:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3fZE-He-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157125 |
I'm responding to this because I believe it is right to do so. Anyone is welcome to draw their own conclusions. I have no desire for flame wars or hyperbole, I just think there are legitimate practical issues that can be discussed if we keep our heads. On Mon, 2015-08-31 at 01:00 +1000, Andrew McGlashan wrote: > <snip rubbish> > > Lennart is the /main/ reason systemd exists; vocal or not. > Perhaps you are right, but he really shouldn't be the reason for any discussion. With respect, I see no reason to blame Lennart Poettering for any trouble you might have with systemd. I could name a handful of packages in Jessie that are considered stable, but have rough edges. That is not the upstream developer's fault. Mr. Poettering is not the one who makes the decisions for Debian or anyone else. You should discuss any problems with the package maintainer here at Debian, by submitting a bug report. If you really have a problem with systemd's design, why don't you take the source, fix it and submit the patch? > The linux kernel is bloated, it shouldn't be as large IMHO either. It > too goes against the "*NIX" way.... As a programmer, I find that argument "hilarious", because the first purpose of software is to be useful. Ken Thompson coined the idea of the "Unix way" as a design philosophy, and it is a good one - but he also knew when to ignore it. The concept that most Linux fans are pushing when they make the "bloated argument" is actually a design philosophy of "worse is better" - that argues simplicity is the key ingredient, even at the cost of it being a bad implementation. If that is your design preference, perhaps you would enjoy looking at things like L4 or Hurd. =) They are really cool micro-kernels. The reason why Linux is not a micro-kernel is really performance. In the real world, sometimes "simple design" incurs a performance penalty. In the real world, you end up making certain trade-offs, and often it has to do with the size and complexity of the code. You are right in that sometimes things can be done better, but then again, but no one is stopping you. The code is open, and you all you have to do is make a patch. > > Read Lennart's own blog, you'll see that he is "in the business" of > making Linux his own; thus my coined phrase "Lennart's Linux" > . Lennart's opinions really do not have any bearing the discussion, any more than Linus's. Both are interesting, and very opinionated gentlemen. Our only concern is freedom of source code, and so their opinions are irrelevant. > > I want no part of Lennart Linux and I don't want ANY feature creep to > lessen my freedom of choice for any essential component on my systems. I'm not criticizing you personally, but I have heard this said by many people, almost verbatim. It's not right to expect everyone to do things the way you or I insist upon. No one is forcing anyone to use anything. No one is impinging your freedom. The code is there specifically so you can patch it, and compile it yourself if you want. If you don't like something, patch it. That is the whole point of open source. You have your freedom. All you need do is exercise it. > > Once you take in systemd, you are going to get to the stage that it > will be necessary whether you like it or not. Not true. It is a choice. If you don't like systemd then you can always compile the code yourself. Debian made a choice that they believed was in the best interests of their users at the time. It's always easy to put other people on the "hot seat", but when you are making the decisions sometimes there are no easy answers. In an organization as large as Debian, not everyone is going to be happy with every decision. When I first heard about the Debian TC decision, I was very unhappy. I've come to realize that if I had a problem, it was not the TC's fault, it was mine. Debian is essentially the efforts of a lot of different people, and I have no right to criticize their work, if I am not putting in the same effort. Debian as a whole does a lot of effort. > > And ANYONE whom speaks against systemd is, quite simply, just like one > who utters the name Voldermort in the Harry Potter story. Both are > just as evil, but one is purely fictional. Personally, I am neither for or against systemd. I've come to see it as just another piece of software. If it fails expectations it will be replaced. It's as simple as that. Take care and have a great day! T.J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI <renaud@olgiati-in-paraguay.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 21:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3gj0-1iE-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157133 |
On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:56:18 -0500
"T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you really have a problem with systemd's design, why don't you take
> the source, fix it and submit the patch?
Sadly, considering the effort that has been spent (wasted ?)
developing systemd, the only fix would be to avoid adopting it,
or later to get rid of it completely
Cheers,
Ron.
--
Luck, that's when preparation and opportunity meet.
-- P.E. Trudeau
-- http://www.olgiati-in-paraguay.org --
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Wanderer <wanderer@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 21:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3gM1-1Rd-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157136 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On 2015-08-30 at 15:08, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: > On Sun, 30 Aug 2015 13:56:18 -0500 "T.J. Duchene" > <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> wrote: > >> If you really have a problem with systemd's design, why don't you >> take the source, fix it and submit the patch? > > Sadly, considering the effort that has been spent (wasted ?) > developing systemd, the only fix would be to avoid adopting it, or > later to get rid of it completely Not to mention that some of the changes which would be necessary to fix some parts of the design have already been pre-rejected by upstream; they've specifically and explicitly stated that patches to remove the interdependencies among the various components will not be accepted. I don't have a link handy for that, but I could dig one up if it were really necessary. I don't particularly want to dive as deeply into the systemd discussion environment as that would require, though. Plus, at least to all appearances, some of the problems with the design can pretty much only be fixed by removing features and functionality. The systemd developers seem to think that those features and that functionality are worth the cost, so of course they aren't going to accept patches to remove those things. Short of that, my own first step in trying to "fix" systemd would probably be to disambiguate the names, so that we don't refer to the binary which gets executed as PID1 _and_ the collection of other binaries which orbits that binary _and_ the project which develops all of these binaries by one single undistinguished name. So far as I can see, no one else seems to have the slightest interest in this. My second step would probably be to A: clearly define which of the interfaces involved in the project are "internal" (and subject to change without notice) and which are "external" (and guaranteed to remain stable in the long term, to be removed or see non-backwards-compatible changes only with a years-long deprecation process if at all), and B: define the boundaries in such a way that any interface which one of the project's "modular" components uses to communicate with another such component is considered an external interface. My reasoning in that latter is more or less as follows: * In order for a component of a system to be properly considered "modular", it must be possible not only to remove that component without interfering with the functioning of the rest of the system (except perhaps by way of explicitly declared dependencies), but to have the option of replacing it with an alternative component which is developed and maintained by a third party. * A third-party tool cannot safely use or depend on an internal interface of a different project. (I believe even the current systemd project would agree with this statement.) * Therefore, either the interfaces between the components are not internal interfaces, or those components are not modular. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-30 22:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3hyq-30I-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157140 |
On 08/30/2015 02:44 PM, The Wanderer wrote: > On 2015-08-30 at 15:08, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: > >> Sadly, considering the effort that has been spent (wasted ?) >> developing systemd, the only fix would be to avoid adopting it, or >> later to get rid of it completely > Not to mention that some of the changes which would be necessary to fix > some parts of the design have already been pre-rejected by upstream; > they've specifically and explicitly stated that patches to remove the > interdependencies among the various components will not be accepted. I honestly doubt most of the people on this list would attempt to upstream a patch to the systemd project, even if they had one. If you personally prefer a Linux system sans systemd, it is very possible. I know this because I have actually built 95% of base Linux from source by hand - multiple times - over the last 17 years. In my opinion, if you don't want to take the effort to do the work, then you simply have to accept other's decisions regarding what they compiled in. > > I don't have a link handy for that, but I could dig one up if it were > really necessary. I don't particularly want to dive as deeply into the > systemd discussion environment as that would require, though. With respect, I hope I do not sound pompous or arrogant when I say that many do not have any idea what they are talking about because they never dig into the code. If you have a legitimate complaint, then I am "all ears." I am ready to stand up with you if I think you are right, but if no one ever looks at the code, they are standing on shaky ground at best. While there are some legitimate design arguments against systemd, I honestly do not comprehend why most complain. Some only parrot other's views, which I find very distasteful. > > Plus, at least to all appearances, some of the problems with the design > can pretty much only be fixed by removing features and functionality. > The systemd developers seem to think that those features and that > functionality are worth the cost, so of course they aren't going to > accept patches to remove those things. That does not make the problem insurmountable. One programmer created a systemd fork called "uselessd." > > > Short of that, my own first step in trying to "fix" systemd would > probably be to disambiguate the names, so that we don't refer to the > binary which gets executed as PID1 _and_ the collection of other > binaries which orbits that binary _and_ the project which develops all > of these binaries by one single undistinguished name. So far as I can > see, no one else seems to have the slightest interest in this. The names are really arbitrary, so we can leave that one be for now. > > My second step would probably be to A: clearly define which of the > interfaces involved in the project are "internal" (and subject to change > without notice) and which are "external" (and guaranteed to remain > stable in the long term, to be removed or see non-backwards-compatible > changes only with a years-long deprecation process if at all), and B: > define the boundaries in such a way that any interface which one of the > project's "modular" components uses to communicate with another such > component is considered an external interface. If I might suggest, you could start by looking at the systemd design documents. One thing that virtually ALL of open source does horribly is API documentation, so you can't just blame systemd if something falls short of your expectations. That is why I advocate looking at the code along with the docs. > > My reasoning in that latter is more or less as follows: > > * In order for a component of a system to be properly considered > "modular", it must be possible not only to remove that component without > interfering with the functioning of the rest of the system (except > perhaps by way of explicitly declared dependencies), but to have the > option of replacing it with an alternative component which is developed > and maintained by a third party. Speaking from experience, upstream projects are always going to go their own way. That is WHY we use something like Debian in the first place. Debian acts as a buffer between us, and the crazy ideas upstream. Regardless of what upstream might do, Debian settles on a particular version and supports it for at least 2-5 years with each release. That means the Debian version of systemd is going to be stable enough to do what you are suggesting. So you could replace components if you wanted to make the effort. Once stability becomes the expectation, other projects adopt the same stance and upstream pays attention to that. I've seen this more than once in my dealings with open source over the years. Upstream wants to do whatever they want. Distributors want stability. Usually, they meet in the middle. T.J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 00:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3iNR-4Ih-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157146 |
On 08/30/2015 03:33 PM, T.J. Duchene wrote: > > > On 08/30/2015 02:44 PM, The Wanderer wrote: >> On 2015-08-30 at 15:08, Renaud (Ron) OLGIATI wrote: >> >>> Sadly, considering the effort that has been spent (wasted ?) >>> developing systemd, the only fix would be to avoid adopting it, or >>> later to get rid of it completely >> Not to mention that some of the changes which would be necessary to fix >> some parts of the design have already been pre-rejected by upstream; >> they've specifically and explicitly stated that patches to remove the >> interdependencies among the various components will not be accepted. > > I honestly doubt most of the people on this list would attempt to upstream a patch to the systemd project, even if they had one. If you personally prefer a Linux system sans systemd, it is very possible. > I know this because I have actually built 95% of base Linux from source by hand - multiple times - over the last 17 years. In my opinion, if you don't want to take the effort to do the work, then you simply > ave to accept other's decisions regarding what they compiled in. > > /snip/ That's easy for you to say, since you are obviously a programmer. The rest of us may never have programmed anything, and C just looks like some foreign language --which it is! What we would like is stability, and until Poettering started messing with Linux, we pretty much had it--at least in any given distro. --doug
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 06:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3pcB-5FV-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157149 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> wrote: > > > > That's easy for you to say, since you are obviously a programmer. The rest > of us may never have programmed anything, and C just looks like some > foreign language --which it is! > That's very true, Doug. I have nothing but sympathy for the non-programmer, honestly. You are basically at the mercy of people like myself, and I am honestly sorry that that is the case. I wish it did not require a special skill set. In our defense, however, we have worked long and hard in our craft as you have in yours. > What we would like is stability, and until Poettering started messing with > Linux, we pretty much had it--at least in any given distro. That's where we part in agreement. You can't blame Poettering for messing with Linux. The distributor makers looked at systemd and realized that it would make things easier for them. Systemd fills a distributor's need. You don't have to like it, but only Debian is responsible for Debian. Poettering had no input in that decision, so you should not blame him for it. Frankly, at no point have I seen Linux become more "unstable" because of systemd. In my experience, Linux as an operating system is not horribly stable when you use the bleeding edge releases. It's much better than Windows most of the time, but I would not use even a stable Linux in a nuclear reactor. Linux is not designed for extreme stability. T.J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joel Rees <joel.rees@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 12:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3ulY-4K1-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157172 |
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 1:39 PM, T.J. Duchene <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Doug <dmcgarrett@optonline.net> wrote: >> >> That's easy for you to say, since you are obviously a programmer. The rest >> of us may never have programmed anything, and C just looks like some foreign >> language --which it is! > > > That's very true, Doug. I have nothing but sympathy for the non-programmer, > honestly. You are basically at the mercy of people like myself, and I am > honestly sorry that that is the case. I wish it did not require a special > skill set. In our defense, however, we have worked long and hard in our > craft as you have in yours. Actually, there's a couple or three questions going begging here, that I'd like to ask: (1) TJ, have you ever built LFS? Or, even better, built a running OS on top of the Linux kernel without even the help of the LFS tutorial and tool set? (1a) If you have, have you ever implemented your own init system for a Linux-based OS that you built yourself? (2) Having done that much, have you ever kept that system maintained and updated, even at just the level of keeping only the critical applications patched or updated against vulnerabilities on a timely basis? Okay, there's actually one more question here: (3) Have you ever done the first two while holding down a full-time, 40+ hour a week job that doesn't particularly make allowances for employees that need to spend the time necessary for maintaining their OS? If you have, how long did you keep it up without developing personality issues for lack of sleep, developing dysfunctional digestion problems like ulcers and diabetes, and/or ending up breaking up your family? Answer honestly. (There is a reason that people get together to make distributions, you know.) -- Joel Rees Be careful when you look at conspiracy. Arm yourself with knowledge of yourself, as well: http://reiisi.blogspot.jp/2011/10/conspiracy-theories.html
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "T.J. Duchene" <t.j.duchene@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-08-31 22:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <q3DyX-1dj-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #157197 |
On 08/31/2015 05:14 AM, Joel Rees wrote: > > Actually, there's a couple or three questions going begging here, that > I'd like to ask: Sure, ask away! =) > > (1) TJ, have you ever built LFS? Or, even better, built a running OS > on top of the Linux kernel without even the help of the LFS tutorial > and tool set? No, I have never used LFS. I have, however rebuilt or otherwise modified: Debian, Gentoo, RedHat and others over the last couple decades. That is not including other things Unix: like Solaris. No, I have not always had documentation and sometimes had to figure it would myself. Is there a more specific answer you wanted? > > (1a) If you have, have you ever implemented your own init system for a > Linux-based OS that you built yourself? No, I never had a reason to. As with many things, necessity breeds invention. I have had no reason to invent my own when I can modify an existing one to do what I want. With respect, I doubt most programmers would bother creating an entirely new init unless they had a pressing need or just wanted something new. The whole point of open source is adaptation. There are quite a few inits to chose from. The fact that Systemd was created in addition to the dozen or so previously existed probably had more to do with cgroups than anything else if you ask me. > > (2) Having done that much, have you ever kept that system maintained > and updated, even at just the level of keeping only the critical > applications patched or updated against vulnerabilities on a timely > basis? Yes, I have. I used to manage servers for ISPs. Yes, I'd even patched them by hand because the OEM no longer provided updates. > Okay, there's actually one more question here: > > (3) Have you ever done the first two while holding down a full-time, > 40+ hour a week job that doesn't particularly make allowances for > employees that need to spend the time necessary for maintaining their > OS? Well, I can honestly say "No." As I said, I have never bothered to write a new init from scratch. What you are really asking is when I was working other jobs as we all have, and maintain my own systems as best I could on my own time. Sure. We all do the best we can. None of us are perfect and I have never claimed to be either. > If you have, how long did you keep it up without developing > personality issues for lack of sleep, developing dysfunctional > digestion problems like ulcers and diabetes, and/or ending up breaking > up your family? Well, to be perfectly honest, I do have some of those problems. Some are bad enough to where I am probably on medication for the rest of my life. I even have a few others heaped on top of them that you didn't mention, like cerebral palsy and arthritis. Actually, cerebral palsy is why I got into computers in the first place. I understand why you asked. You are probably wondering if I have unreasonable expectations of others. I don't. I don't expect someone like Doug to compile everything from scratch, or you to rebuild Debian by yourself. Conversely, I do expect anyone - myself included - to back up what they are saying with good reasons and at least some experience. I also prefer that in discussions of this nature, that people maintain some logical distance - separating the person from the code. Lennart Poettering is not systemd and systemd is not Lennart Poettering. If that is not possible, then I really see no point in continuing. A lot of people posting over systemd forget or do not realize a lot of important details - for example: 1. Many other people had added and subtracted from the code before you or I ever got our hands on it, including Debian. 2. GCC is also a finicky beast, and is hardly bug free. It matters what compiler is used, even when compiling the kernel, much less anything else. You can introduce bugs into software just by using a different version of GCC than what the developers are using. 3. The management tools for systemd are written in Python. I personally find it a very questionable choice. It can be considered famous for hard to find runtime bugs. Take care! T.J.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web