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This discussion has been archived.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: 1) by rtfazeberdee on Thursday September 03 2015, @02:14PM

    by rtfazeberdee (5847) on Thursday September 03 2015, @02:14PM (#231750)

    "More importantly, I wonder how all the distros that have caved to this bullshit are starting to feel." - they know a lot more than you do hence they took this road.
    "If I understand correctly, kdbus in the kernel will become a requirement in spite of the fact that the kernel devs will have no part of it. " you don't understand correctly which is indicative of your whole post.

  • (Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday September 03 2015, @02:30PM

    by digitalaudiorock (688) on Thursday September 03 2015, @02:30PM (#231757) Journal

    Wow...really specific. Seems most people here disagree with you. I guess they don't know anything either right?

    I've been coding in unix since the 80s. How the fuck do you know what I know?

    • (Score: 0) by rtfazeberdee on Friday September 04 2015, @03:28PM

      by rtfazeberdee (5847) on Friday September 04 2015, @03:28PM (#232286)

      so what if most posters disagree, most are ACs who could be just be a few misinformed people. As most of them didn't understand the article and hence all the crap responses to it, i don't count them as knowledgeable on this particular subject. I don't care if you've be coding since Babbage's time, things move on and sometimes the longer you've been doing the same thing the harder it is to deal with new things. Out of interest, are you still using Linux 0.99 and Motif or CDE (or just cli)?

  • (Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday September 03 2015, @02:39PM

    by digitalaudiorock (688) on Thursday September 03 2015, @02:39PM (#231769) Journal

    FFS...I just realized that you just joined here to post this shit. Typical. Get a life and go fuck yourself.