Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
Why is Gentoo not switching to systemd? Part 2
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 18, 19, 20  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
229566
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Aug 2010
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 11:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
Fedora is consistent - that's their experimentation platform, the playpen.


That's precisely my point. Fedora is a well known beta platform for RHEL, despite the fanbois fervently arguing it ain't so. This is not in disrespect of Fedora, I've used it myself as my primary distro for months. This is just the reality, after all RHEL is a stabilized Fedora. It didn't get The Segfault Distro name for nothing, so from that perspective I don't think RH will find anything out of the ordinary in accepting the development patterns LP is talking about - ie. not supporting "old" kernels etc...

The real question is, if maintaining "older" systEmd requirements is below the godship of LP and his cabal - who is going to maintain the really long supported Red Hat Enterprise Linux ecosystems? We're talking 7, 8 and possibly 9 before 7 becomes unsupported.

ct85711 wrote:
The fun part of all the bugs being directed up to RH, they either get ignored till next patch then mass closed as unsupported or marked as NOT A BUG.


I'm actually hoping that to be the final straw that breaks the decision makers' backs and triggers massive evolution from systemd/Linux back to GNU/Linux. It's not schadenfreude, okay maybe it is a tiny bit, but one really has to hope for stuff like that to happen because reason (technical merits, UNIX tradition, sanity, ....) obviously doesn't play much of a role.

As others have mentioned here, it should be completely ignored and rejected, treated like utter garbage and malware, because it is too toxic for the ecosystem. Because I am really pro choice and if it weren't shoved down our throats like that, I think sYstemd would be a valuable piece of software to learn from - it contains some good ideas and it is also a very good example how NOT to design systems. Users wanting to shoot themselves in the foot and use it are welcome to do so, Viva le software libre!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 4405
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The Debian GNU/Linux project has decided not to support its GNU/kFreeBSD distribution as an official release for the forthcoming version 8.0 which is better known as Jessie


the reason being systemd perhaps

As far as I'm concerned just another nail in debians coffin.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, RX 550 & 560, 5.5.15 zen kernel, gcc 9.3.0
Acer E5-575 (laptop), i3-7100u - i965, 5.0.13 zen kernel, gcc 8.2.0
---both---
profile 17.1 (no-pie & modified) amd64-no-multilib eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
229566
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Aug 2010
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
Quote:
The Debian GNU/Linux project has decided not to support its GNU/kFreeBSD distribution as an official release for the forthcoming version 8.0 which is better known as Jessie


For reference, I believe this is the horse's mouth:

https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg00005.html

Quote:
We discussed kfreebsd at length, but are not satisfied that a
release with Jessie will be of sufficient quality. We are dropping
it as an official release architecture, though we do hope that the
porters will be able to make a simultaneous unofficial release.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3423

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For the moment I believe we're seeing a "priority inversion" in the Linux ecosystem. For a large swath thereof, systemd has become more important than functionality, portability, security, etc. To be fair, many of the systemd proponents see systemd as the path to functionality, portability, security, etc. They kind of fail to see that the Linux and before it Unix ecosystem have been surviving quite well for decades without systemd.

My big fear is that systemd promises some things that I'm absolutely sure that corporate types and IT department management will absolutely love. That recent quip about removing "/usr/local" nailed it. From what I can tell, systemd promises to deliver the "corporate machine" - fully locked down, fully controllable by your central administration group. Full upgrade, rollback, zero local configuration, etc, etc, etc. One size fits all. That makes me fear that some corporate egos really will get behind systemd, because it promises so much that they LOVE. Once egos are involved, minor concerns like functionality and technical merits get thrown out the door.

I suspect many in the Linux ecosystem are also behind systemd because L.P. has promised them World Domination. Unfortunately nobody has asked the question, "domination by whom?"

However, it's also worth remembering that none of us here think that systemd will survive wide-scale deployment into a diverse environment unscathed. L.P. still has an aggressive development roadmap even as RHEL7 is beginning to ship. There's an old adage, "no battle plan survives contact with the enemy," so it will be interesting to see how L.P.'s roadmap survives contact with widescale non-fanbois users, who just want the thing to work in their diverse environments. Then there are the security, attack surface, and attack monoculture issues.

If systemd does survive its widescale deployment without significant problems, if its security record turns out better than historical, perhaps we really are fossilized curmudgeons. I don't think so.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 4405
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

When enough sysd based systems get into the wild there will be a major attack on those systems. (yes when not if)

What we won't hear is RH, LP, the cabal and the fanboi choir saying "oh linux is secure it's sysd that's not"

Unfortunately all of linux will get the black eye.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, RX 550 & 560, 5.5.15 zen kernel, gcc 9.3.0
Acer E5-575 (laptop), i3-7100u - i965, 5.0.13 zen kernel, gcc 8.2.0
---both---
profile 17.1 (no-pie & modified) amd64-no-multilib eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3423

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anon-E-moose wrote:
When enough sysd based systems get into the wild there will be a major attack on those systems. (yes when not if)

What we won't hear is RH, LP, the cabal and the fanboi choir saying "oh linux is secure it's sysd that's not"

Unfortunately all of linux will get the black eye.


Linux is more than just RedHat. There will be other companies out there who have made a living deploying and securing Linux for many years, and they will take this as an opportunity to sell their wares. They're not going to take one for L.P. and RedHat, they're not going to say, "Linux is only so secure," they're going to say, "Buy our wares and Linux will continue to be secure."

I have a friend (who will remain unnamed) at one of those companies (which will remain unnamed) and have asked for opinions there about systemd. The friend isn't in the technical ranks at the company, and when I asked was only vaguely familiar with the term "systemd". I'll be curious to see what I hear, if anything.

The Linux ecosystem is much bigger than RedHat. So far I suspect much of the commercial ecosystem has also lined up behind systemd, because of the level of corporate control it promises. But I also believe they're letting RedHat be the tub-thumpers for systemd and have put little visible ego into it themselves. If systemd falls on its face, they'll be happy to backtrack and sweep up market share. If it succeeds they'll be happy to stay on RedHat's coattails. Think about it, and it's the sensible posture to take. However they're not going to let systemd take their market away, either way.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Anon-E-moose
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 4405
Location: Dallas area

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
Linux is more than just RedHat.


Indeed but when the first major attack happens, most of the reports by news outlets won't make that distinction.

I can almost guarantee that "linux" will be blamed not RH, LP, etc.

Edit to add: We know different, but we won't be writing the stories.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, RX 550 & 560, 5.5.15 zen kernel, gcc 9.3.0
Acer E5-575 (laptop), i3-7100u - i965, 5.0.13 zen kernel, gcc 8.2.0
---both---
profile 17.1 (no-pie & modified) amd64-no-multilib eudev, openrc, openbox, palemoon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
229566
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Aug 2010
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So what is this corporate control you guys speak of? What does systeMd do in that department that you can't already do? Because you can pretty much lock down a UNIX or GNU/Linux system today with existing tools. You can lock it down so hard that not even root is capable of doing anything beyond the set policy - ie. SELinux constrained root. If you aren't talking about ACLs, what then? Software installation? Configuration? Central management of those? Plenty of config management tools on the market already. Upstream consolidation? eg. tools like ntpd, nss, dhcp(cd), hostname, etc.. all becoming reinvented sYstemd daemons?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3423

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 2:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrueXYZ wrote:
So what is this corporate control you guys speak of? What does systeMd do in that department that you can't already do? Because you can pretty much lock down a UNIX or GNU/Linux system today with existing tools. You can lock it down so hard that not even root is capable of doing anything beyond the set policy - ie. SELinux constrained root. If you aren't talking about ACLs, what then? Software installation? Configuration? Central management of those? Plenty of config management tools on the market already. Upstream consolidation? eg. tools like ntpd, nss, dhcp(cd), hostname, etc.. all becoming reinvented sYstemd daemons?


The difference is the definition of "you". The difference is also the thoroughness of the lockdown. Our systems are locked down - to some degree. But it's also possible to grab root for 10 minutes, in order to install a needed package. With systemd the lockdown is planned to add something below the mounted filesystem level, in two respects:
1 - Getting rid of /usr/local - Really redefining the FileSystem Hierarchy Standard - The normal purpose of /usr/local and /opt is for stuff outside of the realm of the package management system. In the New World Order nothing is outside of the systemd purvey, so there is no need for such nonsense as /usr/local any more.
2 - Working with BTRFS snapshots. That's why I said "below the mounted filesystem level." They want to use snapshots as a deployment/rollback system.

Finally, for values of "you" I would have said that RH would hand the keys to the kingdom over to the system administrators that they're selling to. That's "the old Unix Way". We all know how much respect L.P. has for "the old Unix Way." I wonder how this decision will fall.

Sometimes I wonder if RedHat really knows what L.P. is doing. Once the founders left, how Unix/Linux-savvy is corporate management there? Do they really know what they're getting into, or have they bought the whole World Domination spiel?
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
229566
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Aug 2010
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
1 - Getting rid of /usr/local - Really redefining the FileSystem Hierarchy Standard


I suppose that is just a matter of convention, there really aren't any new ACLs or security policies being involved. The software management tools remain the same. So it's not something that corporate policy can't be enforced for even without systemd. It doesn't make anything about it easier either, except having one tool, systemctl, do stuff otherwise done by a number of tools.

If anything, it breaks existing auditing policies. I'm pretty sure the corporate policies don't care where stuff is located as long as it is in a predictable location that doesn't change and that their auditing tools can verify that before deployment of anything.


depontius wrote:
2 - Working with BTRFS snapshots.


But that isn't systemd specific, unless I'm missing something?


So, I'm sorry if I sound dense but I really don't see a single item that systemd would introduce to facilitate any kind of internal policy lock down that the corporations might be needing. But on the other side of it is that little fact called stability. Corporations require stability that's what RHEL is promising. Absolutely no change in the API, ABI, config files format and syntax, for the next X years. Not something the ever-changing-by-design systemd thing is trying to achieve. Also, with systemd it becomes the "here we go again" story of re-invented tools going through the same set of bugs and problems the tools it is reinventing have had 20+ years to mature through.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

steveL wrote:
And then to rework the desktops so that there is no single desktop bus, but rather a domain-specific API for each area such as email-notification which uses the underlying POSIX API supplied with libc. That would be similar in form and intent to LADSPA, which is a classic example of how to do this right (in design terms).
CasperVector wrote:
Perhaps I'm no expert in system/architecture design when compared to you guys, but I really think this idea sounds promising.

Yeah that's essentially the same thing we've been discussing in the previous topic: a broadcast message queue.

All that's required is to stipulate that it uses a standard fd, when it comes to standardisation, and that the API works more along the lines of getline() than fgets(), essentially a readonly mapped buffer in our case. And ofc to implement it ;) Thing is you can do all of what's described with an SCTP connection to localhost, so personally I'd pursue that as a reference control, against a mapped/shm queue, which is prior-art, but would work much quicker with a slightly different API.

The other point though is architecturally, why would you want to shove all different sorts of messages down one bus, and even more why on earth would you shove megabytes of data down it, such that you think you have to push it into the kernel to get performance (which sounds a lot like a Microserf tactic, and has always been considered a copout, ime.)

For the desktop, let's be honest and deal with the fact that most of these are really about systray notifications, and handle those as low-hanging fruit, that in fact don't require any sort of newfangled API at all, just basic knowledge of POSIX, which any competent C coder should have. They certainly don't need to shove lots of data around either.

In fact for email I'd just use inotify on whatever Maildir directories are under ~/Mail (at least for my setup based on the KMail I used to love). That would be part of the systray app, and not even need any IPC. I'm willing to concede IMAP users might want a bit more, but again all we're talking about is the desktop email client talking to the desktop systray.

Let's not muddle the picture, nor allow it to be muddled by delusions of grandeur, and designs on the GPL Commons.
Quote:
Judging from s6 and other projects of Laurent, he really seems to be following a much saner (at least when compared to LP & Co.) approach in design and implementation of software.

I have seen this discussion and there indeed exists divergence in opinions between him (@skarnet) and the openrc developers.
IMO, his ideas might not be identical to ours, but can at least provide a decent reference.

Oh for sure: it makes a lot of sense to use whichever parts of his suite are useful to us, though personally I don't favour giving up openrc nor its format. In that light, the more people who are familiar with his codebase, the better, since it may well be what we end up using under the hood, and collaboration with him would only add to the fun. :-)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Sulman
n00b
n00b


Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Posts: 63

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrueXYZ wrote:



So, I'm sorry if I sound dense but I really don't see a single item that systemd would introduce to facilitate any kind of internal policy lock down that the corporations might be needing. But on the other side of it is that little fact called stability. Corporations require stability that's what RHEL is promising. Absolutely no change in the API, ABI, config files format and syntax, for the next X years. Not something the ever-changing-by-design systemd thing is trying to achieve. Also, with systemd it becomes the "here we go again" story of re-invented tools going through the same set of bugs and problems the tools it is reinventing have had 20+ years to mature through.


We're also going to end up with this syntactically weird powershell-like set of commandlets. No more grepping through logs, etc.

It's all very weird.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 3:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrueXYZ wrote:
So what is this corporate control you guys speak of? What does systeMd do in that department that you can't already do? Because you can pretty much lock down a UNIX or GNU/Linux system today with existing tools.

Absolutely; the whole thing is bulshytt.
Code:
Bulshytt: A technical term denoting speech (typically but not necessarily commercial or political) that employs
euphemism, convenient vagueness, numbing repetition, and other such rhetorical subterfuges to create the impression
that something has been said.
<Neal Stephenson, "Anathem">
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
i4dnf
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 267
Location: Bucharest, Romania

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thus it begins:

http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2014/q4/592

Of note the recomandation of RH's very own:
Quote:
(This systemd component is optional, I strongly recommend not to ship it. It's not even possible right now to dump the cache contents to debug such issues.)

--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security

_________________
"The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not MAD" (SALVATOR DALI)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrFluffy
n00b
n00b


Joined: 01 Mar 2011
Posts: 6

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 3:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrueXYZ wrote:
So what is this corporate control you guys speak of? What does systeMd do in that department that you can't already do? Because you can pretty much lock down a UNIX or GNU/Linux system today with existing tools. You can lock it down so hard that not even root is capable of doing anything beyond the set policy - ie. SELinux constrained root. If you aren't talking about ACLs, what then? Software installation? Configuration? Central management of those? Plenty of config management tools on the market already. Upstream consolidation? eg. tools like ntpd, nss, dhcp(cd), hostname, etc.. all becoming reinvented sYstemd daemons?

What its bringing for corporates? I don't think its the lockdown you are thinking of for your benefit.
It's a sad fact that in most big corporates, most of the people are very unskilled, they may have been admin'ing the windows real estate, and been sent on a week unix course then reallocated & threw in at the deep end as a server build tech. Some of those people will have taken a personal interest and skill themselves up by other means, but some are just jaded old mouse clickers part of the furniture who will be around regardless of how much input they put into their development. Its a cost thing at the end of the day, competent people are expensive.
They are the type of people who need all the X installs and gui's and everything accessible via citrix desktop from a corporate windows laptop. init scripts look very complex and archaic, it scares people, along with having to see a dmesg and other stuff. They just want that part of the process click and gone with just a splash screen with a logo while the os abstracts away whats happening underneath because it reminds them they aren't as skilled as they could be. They don't even want to use different parts of the system to configure it, it should be all in one place like what they are used to (dare I suggest windows registry), what is all this outdated crap? text files in a directory? is this a model T or what? we shouldn't have this in the 21st century, thats for crusty old greybeards and they just want it to look hard to protect their mystique. Consolidate everything into a single layer, and give it a single point of configuration so we don't have to learn all these component names and subsystems and remove all that archaic anarchy that is today's system, lets have a modern system to handle it.

In every company there are small pockets of expertise trying to explain and mentor people, but its a very rearguard action at times. Its all a incredible mess under the hood, so bad these pockets are swamped trying to keep their tiny segment going and there's not enough to go round so the fringe cases that are not seen as important are left to the retrained people. So the people that don't really have a passion for it, they don't mind if the hood gets welded shut on their redhat car, it scares them to not have every command documented down in a guide by the vendor for every simple mundane task. And RH would be stupid to not weld that hood shut if given the chance further down the road given the control it also would give them. How long before it can be linked into some sort of trusted computing layer?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
229566
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Aug 2010
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrFluffy wrote:
... (snip) ...


None of which is changed by systemd. It doesn't bring in a GUI-operated registry. It doesn't bring in a Microsoft Group Policy Editor. Mouse-clickers can still thrive without systemd using tools like YaST. Systemd is a black box that is not designed for mouse clickers and users, but for developers and integrators (RH's primarily), they want the BSD model of central-OS-plus-ports reimplemented for GNU/Linux but in a way that is one huge NIH debacle.

Yes, it is open source but that is exactly what I mean, it is such for devs and distro integrators, not nearly transparent or configurable to 99.9999% of its users.

I'm a corporate user and a sysadmin. Sure, and I will always admit that there are some great ideas in systemd. But the execution of it and implementation is wrong. And as a corporate user I see zero value to facilitate how I enforce our internal policies. What enforces our internal policies are things like MAC, RBAC, central config management tools and clearly defined strategies. Our tools are based on an ecosystem without systemd and I see zero incentive to switch over, and as a dev I can only cringe at how some things are done internally in systemd and literally have a psychosomatic reaction when I try to imagine that turd on our servers...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3423

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GrueXYZ wrote:
MrFluffy wrote:
... (snip) ...


None of which is changed by systemd. It doesn't bring in a GUI-operated registry. It doesn't bring in a Microsoft Group Policy Editor. Mouse-clickers can still thrive without systemd using tools like YaST. Systemd is a black box that is not designed for mouse clickers and users, but for developers and integrators (RH's primarily), they want the BSD model of central-OS-plus-ports reimplemented for GNU/Linux but in a way that is one huge NIH debacle.

Yes, it is open source but that is exactly what I mean, it is such for devs and distro integrators, not nearly transparent or configurable to 99.9999% of its users.

I'm a corporate user and a sysadmin. Sure, and I will always admit that there are some great ideas in systemd. But the execution of it and implementation is wrong. And as a corporate user I see zero value to facilitate how I enforce our internal policies. What enforces our internal policies are things like MAC, RBAC, central config management tools and clearly defined strategies. Our tools are based on an ecosystem without systemd and I see zero incentive to switch over, and as a dev I can only cringe at how some things are done internally in systemd and literally have a psychosomatic reaction when I try to imagine that turd on our servers...


I'll have to perhaps correct myself, and say that systemd promises to management much more thorough corporate control of systems. Promises are not reality. Other than my home network, I'm not an admin, but I am a corporate user.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
depontius
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3423

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 4:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

And now for something rather interesting...

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/System_Administrators_Guide/chap-Managing_Services_with_systemd.html
https://access.redhat.com/articles/754933

These are the top two non-ad hits for a search on RedHat and systemd. It's interesting in that it's documentation and announcement, but not tub-thumping. Nor does it display the L.P. mission-creep, except for logging. Some of that may represent the state of systemd when it entered RHEL7, but I wonder how much of it may reflect come caution on the part of RH management.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
virtguru
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 14 Aug 2010
Posts: 147
Location: Eire

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 6:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

depontius wrote:
And now for something rather interesting...

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux/7/html/System_Administrators_Guide/chap-Managing_Services_with_systemd.html
https://access.redhat.com/articles/754933


On that second article, cannot believe the trash the RH technical writers produce, example regarding section "Comparing systemd to Traditional init"

https://access.redhat.com/articles/754933 wrote:
Also, the older System V init scripts were actual shell scripts. The systemd files tasked to do the same job are more like .ini files that contain the information needed to launch a service.


Speechless.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ottre
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 23 Dec 2012
Posts: 129

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Has this been posted before?

In order to workaround a technical flaw in systemd, the HPPA port of the Linux kernel and glibc have been patched.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
avx
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2152

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 9:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Debian 8 "Jessie" was frozen on 5th November 2014


Remember, remember the 5th of november.

2014-1605=409, 409 is a song by the Beach Boys containing
Quote:
When I take her to the track she really shines
She always turns in the fastest time


Quote:
The plan was to blow up the House of Lords during the State Opening of England's Parliament on 5 November 1605, as the prelude to a popular revolt in the Midlands during which James's nine-year-old daughter, Princess Elizabeth, was to be installed as the Catholic head of state.


Exercise for the reader: find a way to get to the current modern context by replacing given words with: Linux, Debian, Lennart Poettering. Can you find more?

:twisted:
_________________
++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>++.>+.+++++++..+++.>++.<<+++++++++++++++.>.+++.------.--------.>+.>.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
djdunn
l33t
l33t


Joined: 26 Dec 2004
Posts: 780
Location: Arrakis

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 11:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The plan was to blow up Linux ecosystem during Debians freezing of Jessie on 5 November 2014, as the prelude to a popular revolt in #Gentoo during which RedHats nine-year-old daughter, Lennart Poettering, was to be installed as the Linux head of state.

DID IT
_________________
A process cannot be understood by stopping it. Understanding must move with the flow of the process, must join it and flow with it.

-The First Law of Mentat
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
229566
Tux's lil' helper
Tux's lil' helper


Joined: 16 Aug 2010
Posts: 127

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

djdunn wrote:
The plan was to blow up Linux ecosystem during Debians freezing of Jessie on 5 November 2014, as the prelude to a popular revolt in #Gentoo during which RedHats nine-year-old daughter, Lennart Poettering, was to be installed as the Linux head of state.


Shai-Hulud! Hahahaha! RH's nine year old daughter LP.... :mrgreen:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
avx
Advocate
Advocate


Joined: 21 Jun 2004
Posts: 2152

PostPosted: Wed Nov 12, 2014 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

djdunn wrote:
The plan was to blow up Linux ecosystem during Debians freezing of Jessie on 5 November 2014, as the prelude to a popular revolt in #Gentoo during which RedHats nine-year-old daughter, Lennart Poettering, was to be installed as the Linux head of state.

DID IT


Congratulations, you earned 100 Internet Points. Bad news is, 99 points need to be substracted as the placement of LP was obviously made easy on purpose :twisted:
_________________
++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<-]>++.>+.+++++++..+++.>++.<<+++++++++++++++.>.+++.------.--------.>+.>.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
steveL
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery

PostPosted: Thu Nov 13, 2014 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i4dnf wrote:
Thus it begins: http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2014/q4/592

Interesting; so systemdbug offers:
Code:
a `stub resolver' ... no defence against bad nameservers or fake packets which appear to come from your real nameservers.
You MUST use a firewall or other means to block packets which appear to come from these nameservers, but
which were actually sent by other, untrusted, entities.
That sounds like a recipe for disaster, given that it's being pushed for people's laptops and tablets, and even more so when we consider that it simply is unable to do the standards-compliant ARP checking -- by design (for faster dhcp recovery.)
Quote:
Of note the recommendation of RH's very own:
Quote:
(This systemd component is optional, I strongly recommend not to ship it. It's not even possible right now to dump the cache contents to debug such issues.)
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security

Hehe that is telling.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Gentoo Chat All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 18, 19, 20  Next
Page 3 of 20

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum