On Jul 8, 2014, at 6:27 PM, Always Learning <centos@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> That is a fundamental worry. Everything, except the kernel, dependent on
> Poettering's (employed by Red Hat) windows-style gigantic systemd.
> Nothing can run without systemd's prior consent. One tiny bug in systemd
> and everything crashes. Is that RH's new "resilience" strategy?
>
I've been not so subtly hinting that I think this kind of thing could and will destroy
Linux - at least in any context other than rolling your other distribution and hoping
for the best. (at least until they start putting dbus into the kernel - and I cannot
say strongly enough how utterly DUMB that is.)
I don't mean that it will make it go away and people will stop using it and all that.
It'll be going strong in one form or another for decades. What I mean is, that
people who don't know what they're doing will be the only ones to actually be
using it, and those who know better will have long ran off for greener pastures.
And then the large distros will start catering to those inexperienced people, and
mark my words, we're going to end up with a catastrophe sooner rather than later.
Someone's going to put the wrong thing into the kernel, open up a security hole, and
heartbleed all over again. And no one will learn the lesson.
We were worried years ago about Microsoft embracing and extending. That
turned out to be the wrong worry. Looks like the right worry was people making
stupid decisions and killing it from the inside. Congratulations, RedHat and
Poettering - you did (or are doing) what Microsoft couldn't.
I've been toying with the idea of rolling a distribution similar to OpenBSD -
with a focus on security and doing the right thing - no matter what other stupid
crap other people are doing. The problem is that rolling a distro is a lot of work.
But... it may need to be done. The inmates are running the asylum.
--Russell
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
