"Russian integrity", "Russian democracy" or "Russian sobriety" would indeed be oxymorons. You can't deny a good minority of Russians to be intelligent, though. Their country suffering from an unbroken series of bloody dictators for at least 500 years is another matter, and most people learned that trying to fight against the dictator currently in power is far more unhealthy than it would be in most other countries.
And how is this different from most other countries? Take the US: the Nazi Cheeto made justice for the Mother of Lies a big part of his campaign, yet it doesn't look like there's any hope she'll get where she deserves. In return, the Cheeto expects the same courtesy for himself.
I'd go with Horch. It's founder, August Horch, got ousted from his company. A court ruled that he doesn't own the rights to his name, thus he named the next company Audi (Latin translation of "Horch" ("listen")).
Marijuana and alcohol at least make you feel better. Tobacco merely briefly returns you to a bit below the baseline you'd be on were you a non-smoker. No one sane would smoke if not for immense chemical addiction that you contracted due to curiosity, peer pressure, advertising or "looking cool" earlier in your life.
Yeah, the parties are made up of people who advocate shooting others who voted 'wrongly.' In some cases, they only advocate spanking.
Hmm, there is a point in your post: while I obviously named these punishments in jest, I should haven't done so -- there are members of such batshit insane parties who do call for the death penalty for the crime of voting differently than them.
For example, in Poland, a prominent member of our ruling party called for restoring the death penalty specifically for one Donald T., the current president of the European Council, for a variety of crimes such as "diplomatic treason". That party member is Ewa Stankiewicz who doesn't hold any government office, but her idea was seconded by Stanislaw Karczewski, the Marshall of the Senate, who degraded the punishment to only "hard prison" with no parole (there's no such thing as "hard prison" in Polish law since WW2). And no, there's no law that says an elected official must vote according to what the ruling party's leader wants.
These days, it seems to me that the US is a lost cause. So here's an idea: everyone who voted for either Hillary or Trump should be fucking shot. Those who plead they voted so only because they believe the other to be a bigger evil might be let off with only a thorough spanking.
And some other candidates, like Jill Stein, are even worse.
In most countries, we have a mix of batshit insane parties and ones which are only thoroughly corrupt, promoting shit like ACTA but then backpedaling as soon as there are protests, etc -- but at least they're semi-acceptable.
Not so in the US: there's not such thing as a sane party there.
I'd make the order depend on a hash(filename+seed). Thus, kernel #13 will be always the same, and patched versions of kernel #13 will be similar. On regular builds, the seed will be a long (non-bruteforcable) random string, that's still saved with debug info so you can reproduce the kernel you are running.
Wasn't the aim of copyright a temporary right to enrich the creator, so they will create more?
Nope, the aim of copyright was twofold: 1. enrich the king (and give the printers a cut so they don't complain), 2. enforce censorship (only the Worshipful Company of Stationers had a right to print). Anything else is pure propaganda.
Copyrights, since day one, are about as harmful as patents. Whose purpose also, guess what, was to enrich the king.
It was closed because it has already been discussed at length here:
6237 is about running services as the wrong user, 6259 is about usernames allowed by POSIX but not by systemd.
Do you actually have an argument against his logic here? As in a good reason to follow POSIX rules in this case when Linux in general, which is what systemd follows, does not.
Linux doesn't even know about usernames (just uids), you may at most discuss the behaviour of a particular userland program. And every program I know of (a bunch was tested by someone on IRC) except systemd handles ones starting with a digit correctly, as POSIX prescribes. For some reason, adduser (but not, eg, useradd) dislikes creating new accounts with such a name but all it takes is specifying an option when it relaxes the check from names merely discouraged to ones that are illegal only. No other account creation program complains.
The other reason is that you have to accept any legal external input, and input allowed by the standard is certainly legal. And you need to handle illegal input as well, at the very least by returning an error rather than giving full root access.
any actual argument beyond "he immediately closes bugs I think are obvious!"
That's Lennart's usual response to anything that's not obvious to him. Most of us try to at least research a bug or ask the reporter to explain.
Systemd is abysmal for users, but less work for distro maintainers.
For example, service files are drastically shorter than init scripts (albeit unlike them, not universal unless you fall back). This could be easily fixable by using a common library, but that'd be a bit of actual work!
On the other hand, systemd is a complete and utter abomination for sysadmins. When sysv-rc (not sysvinit, these parts are modular!) does something wrong, it's a matter of a single line of shell to hack it for your particular use case. On the other hand, when you want systemd to do something Lennart didn't think of, there's no resource (unless you really want to dig through the source of the huge blob, debug it, recompile, install, then do the whole thing again on an upgrade or security update). Just two examples: 1. the usual idiom of mount --bind a filesystem with complex sub-mounts so you can rsync/etc it in peace, 2. degraded mount of btrfs RAID.
Seriously, an init implementation that conflicts with something as basic as RAID, has no place on any non-toy machine.
I for one wear both hats, of a distro developer and a sysadmin. But it's the latter what I get paid for, thus sorry, no systemd anywhere I can shake a shit-covered stick at.
On Debian, we don't even execute this code by default.
But Ubuntu does. And the other security hole mentioned in the article does apply to Debian.
As for systemd being more than just an init: the problem lies in it replacing a large set of modular projects with an entangled blob. For example, vdev is an (experimental for now) replacement for udev that fixes a number of design problems, yet good luck using it on a systemd system.
As for running systemd without it being init: systemd-shim is dead, and it was flaky to the point of uselessness even while it lived. You need to recompile the Utopia stack to enjoy basics we used to take for granted like being able to shutdown or suspend from a GUI.
People have tried carving out pieces of systemd to use them separately, like uselessd, yet all such attempts I know of ended in failure because of systemd's blobbiness.
Tarring and feathering would indeed be good -- especially that Lennart as usual insta-closes an obvious and nasty security bug[1] as "non-bug". And when presented with standards documents, he says they don't apply to him. Seriously, can someone buy this guy an "Unix for dummies" book?
While we don't exactly suffer from a dearth of kooks, this particular kook enjoys having his employer promote his masterpieces even when totally inadequate. The world would be so much better without systemd, PulseAudio and avahi.
[1]. "0day" is somehow a popular name for CI systems these days, and those often allow weakly-trusted or even completely untrusted submissions.
we don't want streams of shitposts loaded with megabytes of copypasta emojis.
Then block emojis rather than legitimate letters and symbols. And even for them, I fail to see a difference between a shitpost consisting of megabytes of emojis and one consisting of megabytes of ASCII.
If you can't handle controls such as RTL markers, or excessive amounts of combining characters, filter them out. But I don't really see a reason to ban any conventional printable character.
That's why you don't just rotate the snapshots, you organize them into tiers.
For example, the setup I use is: I keep yearlies, monthlies, 1-11-21th day of month, dailies, and (for two machines) 3-hourlies. Yearlies and monthlies don't expire other than manually, others keep 10 of their kind.
If you use btrfs on the backup machine -- with dedupe and compression -- all of this takes surprisingly little space compared to other forms of backup, yet any individual snapshot is available straight as a mounted filesystem, without any extra steps.
Obviously most machines have pull backups: since root privs are needed, it's the backup machine that can control the backupees.
I also have disconnected backups, although I haven't automated that yet.
Well, yeah, it depends on your load. When you prefer individual threads to be as fast as possible even at the cost of total amount of instructions per second done, you obviously want to kill HT. On the other hand, for eg. compiles, HT is a great thing. But if you work in HPC, I don't think I need to explain the need to test your particular load.
Slashdot Mirror
What nation with a powerful central government doesn't demand indelicate acts from its major corporations?
It's more about scale of such acts, and these days Russia and the US are doing this to a ridiculous degree.
"Russian integrity", "Russian democracy" or "Russian sobriety" would indeed be oxymorons. You can't deny a good minority of Russians to be intelligent, though. Their country suffering from an unbroken series of bloody dictators for at least 500 years is another matter, and most people learned that trying to fight against the dictator currently in power is far more unhealthy than it would be in most other countries.
And how is this different from most other countries? Take the US: the Nazi Cheeto made justice for the Mother of Lies a big part of his campaign, yet it doesn't look like there's any hope she'll get where she deserves. In return, the Cheeto expects the same courtesy for himself.
I'd go with Horch. It's founder, August Horch, got ousted from his company. A court ruled that he doesn't own the rights to his name, thus he named the next company Audi (Latin translation of "Horch" ("listen")).
Marijuana and alcohol at least make you feel better. Tobacco merely briefly returns you to a bit below the baseline you'd be on were you a non-smoker. No one sane would smoke if not for immense chemical addiction that you contracted due to curiosity, peer pressure, advertising or "looking cool" earlier in your life.
This is the same state the encourages hard drug addiction by having a "medical marijuana" "dispensary"
Does marijuana shorten your life by 14 years on the average?
Or in this case, an "apples to microsofts" comparison.
Yeah, the parties are made up of people who advocate shooting others who voted 'wrongly.' In some cases, they only advocate spanking.
Hmm, there is a point in your post: while I obviously named these punishments in jest, I should haven't done so -- there are members of such batshit insane parties who do call for the death penalty for the crime of voting differently than them.
For example, in Poland, a prominent member of our ruling party called for restoring the death penalty specifically for one Donald T., the current president of the European Council, for a variety of crimes such as "diplomatic treason". That party member is Ewa Stankiewicz who doesn't hold any government office, but her idea was seconded by Stanislaw Karczewski, the Marshall of the Senate, who degraded the punishment to only "hard prison" with no parole (there's no such thing as "hard prison" in Polish law since WW2). And no, there's no law that says an elected official must vote according to what the ruling party's leader wants.
These days, it seems to me that the US is a lost cause. So here's an idea: everyone who voted for either Hillary or Trump should be fucking shot. Those who plead they voted so only because they believe the other to be a bigger evil might be let off with only a thorough spanking.
And some other candidates, like Jill Stein, are even worse.
In most countries, we have a mix of batshit insane parties and ones which are only thoroughly corrupt, promoting shit like ACTA but then backpedaling as soon as there are protests, etc -- but at least they're semi-acceptable.
Not so in the US: there's not such thing as a sane party there.
If the attacker can read root-only files, you've already lost. And you can opt to have no debug info.
I'd make the order depend on a hash(filename+seed). Thus, kernel #13 will be always the same, and patched versions of kernel #13 will be similar. On regular builds, the seed will be a long (non-bruteforcable) random string, that's still saved with debug info so you can reproduce the kernel you are running.
Microsoft patched the hole long before it was exploited, which is really all you can ask of any company
That would be fine if there was a way to update (and keep updated) their OS without compromising it.
There is not (you'd have to install their telemetry spyware), thus no reasonable patch exists.
Wasn't the aim of copyright a temporary right to enrich the creator, so they will create more?
Nope, the aim of copyright was twofold: 1. enrich the king (and give the printers a cut so they don't complain), 2. enforce censorship (only the Worshipful Company of Stationers had a right to print). Anything else is pure propaganda.
Copyrights, since day one, are about as harmful as patents. Whose purpose also, guess what, was to enrich the king.
So. Just disable systemd-resolved until the problem is... resolved.
I'd heartily recommend running local unbound -- it provides a sane, RFC-compliant, secure, fast, DNSSEC-validating, ISP-bogosity-resistant resolver.
It was closed because it has already been discussed at length here:
6237 is about running services as the wrong user, 6259 is about usernames allowed by POSIX but not by systemd.
Do you actually have an argument against his logic here? As in a good reason to follow POSIX rules in this case when Linux in general, which is what systemd follows, does not.
Linux doesn't even know about usernames (just uids), you may at most discuss the behaviour of a particular userland program. And every program I know of (a bunch was tested by someone on IRC) except systemd handles ones starting with a digit correctly, as POSIX prescribes. For some reason, adduser (but not, eg, useradd) dislikes creating new accounts with such a name but all it takes is specifying an option when it relaxes the check from names merely discouraged to ones that are illegal only. No other account creation program complains.
The other reason is that you have to accept any legal external input, and input allowed by the standard is certainly legal. And you need to handle illegal input as well, at the very least by returning an error rather than giving full root access.
any actual argument beyond "he immediately closes bugs I think are obvious!"
That's Lennart's usual response to anything that's not obvious to him. Most of us try to at least research a bug or ask the reporter to explain.
Systemd is abysmal for users, but less work for distro maintainers.
For example, service files are drastically shorter than init scripts (albeit unlike them, not universal unless you fall back). This could be easily fixable by using a common library, but that'd be a bit of actual work!
On the other hand, systemd is a complete and utter abomination for sysadmins. When sysv-rc (not sysvinit, these parts are modular!) does something wrong, it's a matter of a single line of shell to hack it for your particular use case. On the other hand, when you want systemd to do something Lennart didn't think of, there's no resource (unless you really want to dig through the source of the huge blob, debug it, recompile, install, then do the whole thing again on an upgrade or security update). Just two examples: 1. the usual idiom of mount --bind a filesystem with complex sub-mounts so you can rsync/etc it in peace, 2. degraded mount of btrfs RAID.
Seriously, an init implementation that conflicts with something as basic as RAID, has no place on any non-toy machine.
I for one wear both hats, of a distro developer and a sysadmin. But it's the latter what I get paid for, thus sorry, no systemd anywhere I can shake a shit-covered stick at.
On Debian, we don't even execute this code by default.
But Ubuntu does. And the other security hole mentioned in the article does apply to Debian.
As for systemd being more than just an init: the problem lies in it replacing a large set of modular projects with an entangled blob. For example, vdev is an (experimental for now) replacement for udev that fixes a number of design problems, yet good luck using it on a systemd system.
As for running systemd without it being init: systemd-shim is dead, and it was flaky to the point of uselessness even while it lived. You need to recompile the Utopia stack to enjoy basics we used to take for granted like being able to shutdown or suspend from a GUI.
People have tried carving out pieces of systemd to use them separately, like uselessd, yet all such attempts I know of ended in failure because of systemd's blobbiness.
Tarring and feathering would indeed be good -- especially that Lennart as usual insta-closes an obvious and nasty security bug[1] as "non-bug". And when presented with standards documents, he says they don't apply to him. Seriously, can someone buy this guy an "Unix for dummies" book?
While we don't exactly suffer from a dearth of kooks, this particular kook enjoys having his employer promote his masterpieces even when totally inadequate. The world would be so much better without systemd, PulseAudio and avahi.
[1]. "0day" is somehow a popular name for CI systems these days, and those often allow weakly-trusted or even completely untrusted submissions.
Meanwhile, we grown-ups use Perl and C and laugh at the demise of this week's hipster language.
Now get off my lawn.
3. Don't sexually harass anyone.
That's a condition neither required nor necessary to get accused, and have your life ruined by that.
diet Pepsi
Ie, undrinkable right from the day of manufacture.
Charlemagne and the Franks
The Franks were a germanic tribe that invaded and conquered the Gauls.
Joan of Arc
Not sure how being burned at a stake halfway during a campaign counts as a win.
Napoleon
Utterly crushed.
American independence against the British (the French helped a lot)
If I cheer for and do a favour for someone, may I claim all their victories?
WWI and WWII France started off losing, but eventually won with the help of allies
A battleground/doormat got rescued by allies.
While the meme isn't entirely true, it has quite a bit of validity.
we don't want streams of shitposts loaded with megabytes of copypasta emojis.
Then block emojis rather than legitimate letters and symbols. And even for them, I fail to see a difference between a shitpost consisting of megabytes of emojis and one consisting of megabytes of ASCII.
If you can't handle controls such as RTL markers, or excessive amounts of combining characters, filter them out. But I don't really see a reason to ban any conventional printable character.
That's why you don't just rotate the snapshots, you organize them into tiers.
For example, the setup I use is: I keep yearlies, monthlies, 1-11-21th day of month, dailies, and (for two machines) 3-hourlies. Yearlies and monthlies don't expire other than manually, others keep 10 of their kind.
If you use btrfs on the backup machine -- with dedupe and compression -- all of this takes surprisingly little space compared to other forms of backup, yet any individual snapshot is available straight as a mounted filesystem, without any extra steps.
Obviously most machines have pull backups: since root privs are needed, it's the backup machine that can control the backupees.
I also have disconnected backups, although I haven't automated that yet.
Well, yeah, it depends on your load. When you prefer individual threads to be as fast as possible even at the cost of total amount of instructions per second done, you obviously want to kill HT. On the other hand, for eg. compiles, HT is a great thing. But if you work in HPC, I don't think I need to explain the need to test your particular load.