21–30 of 233 posts
> A user can easily run dynamic library code using LD_PRELOAD in conjunction with some trivial program like ping.
No... Not sure if it ever worked, but it's definitely not possible for many years now.
Also the link to the ASLR effectiveness paper was valid in 2004. That means they're still testing 32bit systems and effectively say scanning 64bit systems the same way is unfeasible.
I still don't understand why systemd sucks
Because people like to complain more than they like to actually build a usable alternative. Edit: here's a great example from one of the links in the other comment: suckless complaining about "sysv removed" in systemd. Link takes you to this changelog entry: "The support for SysV and LSB init scripts has been removed from the systemd daemon itself. Instead, it is now implemented as a generator that creates native sys…
Would love to hear the linux grandfathers chime in...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hating systemd is like hating Hillary Clinton at this point. It's well past time to suck it up and make peace with your next init system/President because the only viable alternative(s) are far worse.
I cannot even begin to describe how silly your comment is. Since when were politicians even comparable to programs? Do we "elect" a init system, as one nation united under Torvalds? I'm hoping I was just trolled by an HN-flavored Markov Chain.
Since people learned the power of the metaphor.
> Do we "elect" a init system
For some distros? Sure. By its nature, Linux, GNU and the open source software that goes into the ecosystem allows people to create new distributions, or choose one of the many that exist. This choice is, in some small way, like a vote. If systemd was really that bad, enough people would work around it to make it's adoption much more problematic.
If you want more than that, some distributions literally vote on features like this, and have voted specifically on systemd[1].
> I cannot even begin to describe how silly your comment is. ... I'm hoping I was just trolled by an HN-flavored Markov Chain.
That doesn't seem very constructive.
1: https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/02/msg00294.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I cannot even begin to describe how silly your comment is. Since when were politicians even comparable to programs? Do we "elect" a init system, as one nation united under Torvalds? I'm hoping I was just trolled by an HN-flavored Markov Chain.
> Since when were politicians even comparable to programs? Since people learned the power of the metaphor. > Do we "elect" a init system For some distros? Sure. By its nature, Linux, GNU and the open source software that goes into the ecosystem allows people to create new distributions, or choose one of the many that exist. This choice is, in some small way, like a vote. If systemd was really that bad, enough people…
The most important point here is that distributions vote on which init system they elect. We are not all electing one init system to rule them all, across Linux. Distributions are nation-states of varying size that follow similar but sometimes incompatible rules, all derived from the same core tenets and program. So we're electing governors from the same political parties, more or less.
I think telling people to suck it up and just accept systemd as their one true init system is just silly. Regardless about how you feel about Clinton, there are always reasons to use something else.
If you need a barebones system, or something for experimentation, or something that is hardened at the price of flexibility, that is an applicable choice, and one you can make from the comfort of your own home. You can't fork the US or an individual state in the same way you can download a different distro to your Raspberry Pi.
And I could go on and on. But you're right; I suppose I could, in the end, begin to describe how silly that comment was. Even if the explanation ended up being really unwieldy and not my best writing. It might not have been wholly constructive either, but we're generally all here to have a good time.
My point is, it's a silly, leaky metaphor. And telling people to suck it up and use an actually useful tool in the comments for a distribution that's written as an elitist hobby project is similarly silly. These people aren't picketing your Debian or Arch systemd parties. They're just doing their own dang thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hating systemd is like hating Hillary Clinton at this point. It's well past time to suck it up and make peace with your next init system/President because the only viable alternative(s) are far worse.
Fortunately, picking an OS and a distro is not like voting in US presidential elections. In particular, there are more than two viable options.
Not only does your vote count, when it comes down to it, yours is the only vote that counts.
Then I think about how I'd patch the next inevitable openssl bug.
Then I don't like it as much.
I still don't understand why systemd sucks
Hating systemd is like hating Hillary Clinton at this point. It's well past time to suck it up and make peace with your next init system/President because the only viable alternative(s) are far worse.