Live data from Hacker News

dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

undeadly.org

41–50 of 79 posts

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I also don’t get: why the hell would do I care which NTP implementation is used in most cases. What I do care about is that it’s running and working. systemd has a good init system and a decent set of other services. Could things be improved? Sure. But honestly as long as when I boot my Debian-derived distro it works as expected why am I going yo go digging into how it works? What can I possibly gain by switchin…

> What I also don’t get: why the hell would do I care which NTP implementation is used in most cases. Because some implementations have time jump while others have it slew it slowly. On boot-up a jump may be fine to get with ± some number of milliseconds, but once the system is running, there are situations where jumps could be a problem (especially in the negative direction, where a moment is "repeated"). > But hone…

I am a sysadmin for some systems. I am merely a user for others. Servers that run my projects? Sure I will dig into what’s up. My Raspberry Pi running Raspbian so I can run my 3D printer off it? I’m a user.

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I also don’t get: why the hell would do I care which NTP implementation is used in most cases. What I do care about is that it’s running and working. systemd has a good init system and a decent set of other services. Could things be improved? Sure. But honestly as long as when I boot my Debian-derived distro it works as expected why am I going yo go digging into how it works? What can I possibly gain by switchin…

I care about which NTP implementation is used because OpenNTPD supports getting time constraints from TLS servers. Which.. no, I absolutely do not actually worry about NTP servers intentionally feeding my laptop the wrong time, but this is just a feature that sounds too cool to ignore. How can I not go out of my way to have that going on?? Sometimes I kinda envy people who don't have this shiny-tech-obsession and are…

Oh don’t get me wrong I customize things. I have just moved on from customizing parts of a Linux distro. At some point I want to customize things that make more of an impact on the real world.

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What can I possibly gain by switching which DHCP client Yesterday I switched to systemd-networkd on debian to gain the feature of having the hostname be set via DHCP and not have to write a script myself. In the process I pulled in a javascript dependency via policykit, which is giving me pause and I am re-evaluating if my approach is correct here. But for this feature I had to switch DHCP server and client. TBF it…

> In the process I pulled in a javascript dependency via policykit, which is giving me pause and I am re-evaluating if my approach is correct here. To be fair, policykit is great. It solves a real problem (namely is this user allowed to peform this action , which traditional POSIX permissions do not solve in a portably) in a very sane way that is totally optional to opt in to. Should polkit use a different, turing co…

> Lua or some other bespoke monstrosity

Lua is definitely the opposite of 'bespoke monstrosity'. It's pretty much the intersection of tiny interpreter, fast execution, and simple language.

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the process I pulled in a javascript dependency via policykit, which is giving me pause and I am re-evaluating if my approach is correct here. To be fair, policykit is great. It solves a real problem (namely is this user allowed to peform this action , which traditional POSIX permissions do not solve in a portably) in a very sane way that is totally optional to opt in to. Should polkit use a different, turing co…

Doesn't POSIX and Linux Standard Base already mandate certain scripting languages to be preinstalled, such as Python?

I've heard a rumour that POSIX mandates that Perl be installed, although I haven't been able to substantiate it.

POSIX-described Turing-complete interpreters include at leat the Bourne shell, awk, and sed, none of which you probably want to use for implementing a security policy.

Apparently LSB 5.0 mandates[1] both Perl (5.8) and Python (2.4), but that won't pacify anyone with an axe to grind about applications making Linux-specific assumptions.

[1]: https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/LSB_5.0.0/LSB-Languages...

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically the opposite of systemd, which is a giant code ball of code with components tightly coupled. > [..] > The use or non-use of of either of these program will also not effect device discovery / hot-plugging, mounting of file systems, system run levels, network time, system logging, etc. This comes up again and again in the systemd discussion, but it's at best a mischaracterization. Yes, there's some code sha…

What I also don’t get: why the hell would do I care which NTP implementation is used in most cases. What I do care about is that it’s running and working. systemd has a good init system and a decent set of other services. Could things be improved? Sure. But honestly as long as when I boot my Debian-derived distro it works as expected why am I going yo go digging into how it works? What can I possibly gain by switchin…

> why the hell would do I care which NTP implementation is used

Allow me to introduce you to BSD users. (I don’t get it either).

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't POSIX and Linux Standard Base already mandate certain scripting languages to be preinstalled, such as Python?

I've heard a rumour that POSIX mandates that Perl be installed, although I haven't been able to substantiate it. POSIX-described Turing-complete interpreters include at leat the Bourne shell, awk, and sed, none of which you probably want to use for implementing a security policy. Apparently LSB 5.0 mandates[1] both Perl (5.8) and Python (2.4), but that won't pacify anyone with an axe to grind about applications makin…

> Apparently LSB 5.0 mandates[1] both Perl (5.8) and Python (2.4)

Wow, that didn't age well. That document actually says Python "2.4.2 or greater" and Perl "5.8.8 or greater", which doesn't help if the installed interpreters are Python 3.10 and Perl 6.c (2018.06), since both are greater than the specified versions but incompatible with them. Even if it had specified the major release (that is, Python 2.x greater than 2.4.2 and Perl 5.x greater than 5.8.8), that wouldn't help once those major releases are no longer maintained.

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An old and somewhat crusty cross-platform daemon replaced by an OS-specific set of daemons, that takes care of managing /etc files that have been there forever. The older solution remains available, but may bitrot or otherwise become harder to maintain in the future. > Wait, isn't this what systemd is "accused" of doing all the time? Each of these do one thing and one thing only. The code is loosely coupled between…

> Basically the opposite of systemd, which is a giant code ball of code with components tightly coupled. > [..] > The use or non-use of of either of these program will also not effect device discovery / hot-plugging, mounting of file systems, system run levels, network time, system logging, etc. This comes up again and again in the systemd discussion, but it's at best a mischaracterization. Yes, there's some code sha…

> Most, if not all, of these components only depend on the service manager (i.e. PID 1).

And dbus. The components being discussed here don't depend on either.

Re: dhcpleased(8) and resolvd(8) enabled in base, replacing dhclient(8)

#48
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure they do, I run a few systems which use systemd with older dhcp daemons. And for example Raspbian uses systemd for process management, but completely disables its network parts, using their own solutions instead. One of the best parts of the systemd is how easy it is to disable/replace any part of it. The resolved and timesyncd are easy, but even things like journald have a mode when it keeps no files on disk, an…

How about removing all of it and just running daemontools, runit or s6. Is this easy.

Not that bad, if you consider writing your own unit files for each service because the system only provides systemd
Post reply on HN