Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday August 31 2015, @04:29PM   Printer-friendly
from the so-su-me dept.

The Linux Homefront Project reports on Lennart Poettering looking to do away with the good old "su" command. From the article, "With this pull request systemd now support a su command functional and can create privileged sessions, that are fully isolated from the original session. Su is a classic UNIX command and used more than 30 years. Why su is bad? Lennart Poettering says:"

Well, there have been long discussions about this, but the problem is that what su is supposed to do is very unclear. On one hand it’s supposed to open a new session and change a number of execution context parameters (uid, gid, env, …), and on the other it’s supposed to inherit a lot concepts from the originating session (tty, cgroup, audit, …). Since this is so weakly defined it’s a really weird mix&match of old and new paramters. To keep this somewhat managable we decided to only switch the absolute minimum over, and that excludes XDG_RUNTIME_DIR, specifically because XDG_RUNTIME_DIR is actually bound to the session/audit runtime and those we do not transition. Instead we simply unset it.

Long story short: su is really a broken concept. It will given you kind of a shell, and it’s fine to use it for that, but it’s not a full login, and shouldn’t be mistaken for one.

I'm guessing that Devuan won't be getting rid of "su."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Informative) by Francis on Monday August 31 2015, @08:57PM

    by Francis (5544) on Monday August 31 2015, @08:57PM (#230448)

    He has no interest in merging those changes into any of the BSDs though. People who want it, would have to download a completely different disc and do a completely different install. And that doesn't replace what people already have.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Informative=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @02:50PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 02 2015, @02:50PM (#231281)

    Seems like he was very much in favor of changing Freebsd, but got so much pushback about it that he has settled for a fork.

    • (Score: 1) by Francis on Wednesday September 02 2015, @04:45PM

      by Francis (5544) on Wednesday September 02 2015, @04:45PM (#231339)

      Probably not. FreeBSD was never run like that. Yes, there have been times when mistakes were made, but *BSD projects are mostly not about ego. Theo, notwithstanding.

      The mailing lists are publicly accessible, if you think that he wanted to put it into the release, I recommend going on and looking. For the most part the developers involved with producing the code are just not that interested in ego. The market share is largely a matter of not feeling the need to go around aggressively bullying people into installing the OS or spreading untrue rumors about the competition like Linux did early on.