Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

dslr.dimakrasner.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 85 posts

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#31

Post by Wicher »

mhd wrote: post #15
codehero wrote: post #7

How does the power efficiency of DSLR compare to Ubuntu? Would I get longer battery life?

I somehow doubt it. Sure, there's a lot less stuff running, so there are fewer wakeups. But on the other hand, it's missing some essential power-saving software like `acpid` that tells bits of hardware to take a rest in the first place.

> [...] like `acpid` that tells bits of hardware to take a rest

I believe that that stuff is mostly in the kernel. Man acpid:

> acpid is designed to notify user-space programs of ACPI events.

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#32

Post by userbinator »

Eiriksmal wrote: post #26
mcintyre1994 wrote: post #4

Nice, I remember being shown DSL and being amazed someone could make an OS that small. > DSLR's approach to security is different . It is possible to run as root without causing a global disaster. Is there any more information available on how this is achieved?

> > DSLR's approach to security is different . It is possible to run as root without causing a global disaster. > Is there any more information available on how this is achieved? +1 to this remark, currently unanswered. Is the "NEVER RUN AS ROOT!" mantra from modern Linux practices, or has it been that way since the mid-90s? After nearly four years of using Fedoras, I'm getting better about remembering what operation…

Is the "NEVER RUN AS ROOT!" mantra from modern Linux practices, or has it been that way since the mid-90s?

I think that goes back all the way to Unix and its multiuser environment, where one admin's mistakes could affect everyone on the system - so people were naturally scared of root.

On the other hand, on the earliest personal computer OSs, which were basically single-user (many don't even have the concept of a "user account"), that only user has full control like root but that wasn't really perceived with as much apprehension since the only thing a mistake affects is the sole user.

With DSLR and all the other tiny Linux distros, I sense that the intention is these are to be used by a single user.

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#33

Post by keenerd »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #4

Nice, I remember being shown DSL and being amazed someone could make an OS that small. > DSLR's approach to security is different . It is possible to run as root without causing a global disaster. Is there any more information available on how this is achieved?

I can't speak for DSLR, but I can say why Puppy Linux runs as root without disaster. (Spent a couple of years writing utilities for them.)

Basically you design the system so that root has no special powers. Imagine if all of your storage was write-once, like a CD-R. What damage could root do? Almost none. Maybe there is a union file system for /usr and /home. Disregard all changes to /usr, when you reboot a fresh /usr is extracted from disk. Stuff like /home is incrementally saved. You can re-wind to any point in history. That is how Puppy (in CD-R mode) works.

About the only real threat that root poses is accidentally dd-ing over the OS boot partition. With some kernel patching you could simply hide the /dev node after the boot is done with it. Though that makes updating harder. Any threat can be neutralized, but the whole OS gets slightly more byzantine as a downside.

The root/user distinction places all your faith in octal permission bits. In some ways a properly designed run-as-root system is less risky, because the safeties are baked into the OS at a much deeper level. It is the difference between a dangerous machine having physical safety interlocks and paper-thin "for your safety" policies.

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#35

Post by Eiriksmal »

userbinator wrote: post #32
Eiriksmal wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > DSLR's approach to security is different . It is possible to run as root without causing a global disaster. > Is there any more information available on how this is achieved? +1 to this remark, currently unanswered. Is the "NEVER RUN AS ROOT!" mantra from modern Linux practices, or has it been that way since the mid-90s? After nearly four years of using Fedoras, I'm getting better about remembering what operation…

Is the "NEVER RUN AS ROOT!" mantra from modern Linux practices, or has it been that way since the mid-90s? I think that goes back all the way to Unix and its multiuser environment, where one admin's mistakes could affect everyone on the system - so people were naturally scared of root. On the other hand, on the earliest personal computer OSs, which were basically single-user (many don't even have the concept of a "us…

Ah... That is very insightful, thank you. I continually forget the days of timesharing, etc. For my entire life (born during the Tiannamen Square riots), personal computers have typically hosted one user at a time.

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#36

Post by codygman »

mhd wrote: post #15
codehero wrote: post #7

How does the power efficiency of DSLR compare to Ubuntu? Would I get longer battery life?

I somehow doubt it. Sure, there's a lot less stuff running, so there are fewer wakeups. But on the other hand, it's missing some essential power-saving software like `acpid` that tells bits of hardware to take a rest in the first place.

Perhaps the project should aim to either integrate acpid or if deemed to heavy, write a lighter version of it.

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#37

Post by cwyers »

Eiriksmal wrote: post #28
lmedinas wrote: post #8

I cannot even think of how many security vulnerabilities exists in these applications used for this "remake".

To quote the DSLR's author Very often, new versions of applications are heavier than older ones (Wirth's Law). If the old version already solves the problem ... without any compromise in security or stability, why make the switch [to a bloated new version]?

The author SAYS that, but that's ALL he says. There's nothing to back up the claim that the older versions are not a compromise in security. Are all known vulnerabilities patched? Are security fixes backported?

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#38

Post by scardine »

Eiriksmal wrote: post #26
mcintyre1994 wrote: post #4

Nice, I remember being shown DSL and being amazed someone could make an OS that small. > DSLR's approach to security is different . It is possible to run as root without causing a global disaster. Is there any more information available on how this is achieved?

> > DSLR's approach to security is different . It is possible to run as root without causing a global disaster. > Is there any more information available on how this is achieved? +1 to this remark, currently unanswered. Is the "NEVER RUN AS ROOT!" mantra from modern Linux practices, or has it been that way since the mid-90s? After nearly four years of using Fedoras, I'm getting better about remembering what operation…

Almost 20 years ago I typed "rm /lib" instead of "rm lib" by mistake. Kernel panic messages started to flash on the terminal and I felt butterflies on my stomach. It was a huge (at the time) Sun machine, took more than 12h to restore it.

That is why I avoid running as root.

Re: DSLR – Damn Small Linux Remake

#39

Post by staz »

Zardoz84 wrote: post #14
mcintyre1994 wrote: post #4

Nice, I remember being shown DSL and being amazed someone could make an OS that small. > DSLR's approach to security is different . It is possible to run as root without causing a global disaster. Is there any more information available on how this is achieved?

uLinux or picoLinux (I don't remember very well the name) -> Runs on one or two 3.5 floppies. There is a version with 3 or 4 floppies with an X-Windows included.

Do you mean muLinux (μLinux) ?

http://ftp.gwdg.de/linux/mulinux/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MuLinux

It was one of my first distro and it was awesome. A base system than ran in one floppy and then you could optionally add and combine more floppys depending of what you wanted (X system, IDE, games, latex, etc...) It was kind of the ancestor to Live CD

Post reply on HN