GNOME and/or systemd
Posted Nov 7, 2012 19:00 UTC (Wed) by
nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to:
GNOME and/or systemd by kevlar
Parent article:
GNOME and/or systemd
Well, I disagree with a substantial proportion of what you have to say.
It also violates the no1 security rule of running as little as possible as root.
systemd is cut into pieces precisely so that this rule is satisfied. It doesn't run things as root unless necessary. Lennart isn't an idiot. (It just runs too much *as PID 1* for me to be happy with it.)
Systemd actually offers a very poor function gain to risk ratio when you pick through the many pre-existing/stolen features and many either wrong assumptions or purposeful lies.
This sentence veers through a variety of logical fallacies at blistering speed:
- There's nothing wrong with writing new software that has some of the same features as pre-existing software -- it's actually a good thing if you want to keep the risk down -- and describing them as 'stolen' is not something I would expect an LWN reader to say. They're not 'stolen'. Lennart did not go round to Scott James Remnant's house and steal the secret Upstart blueprints. He stole nothing.
- The only "wrong assumptions" I can find in systemd are the axiom that portability doesn't matter and all that follows from it, and the axiom that people won't worry if you pile lots of work into PID 1.
- As for "purposeful lies", well, without stating them and providing evidence that Lennart knows those statements to be untrue, this is just a straight insult, and as little worthy of notice.
I think you need some better reasons for not using systemd. (Feel free to take mine. I won't consider it stealing, honest.)
(
Log in to post comments)
