We know.
Unsafe
joined 10 months ago
The thing is that it can work. Which shown by eudev. Looks like it's important for Red Hat to make everyone dependent on SystemD suit.
See the answer on your logind statement.
in there.
Whonix Dev quote:
Use a distribution with an init system other than systemd. systemd contains a lot of unnecessary attack surface... ©Linux Hardening Guide
Because they don't execute million lines super thoroughly checked shell code or why exactly? Without any explanation total FUD.
Because they are not merged with journaling system, job scheduler and watchdog. More features→more attack surface.
Again, more attack surface does not mean anything, to add to that example most people use the precompiled kernel that comes with their distro instead of compiling a leaner one to diminish attack surface, because that's irrelevant.
Most people also don't use selinux or apparmor, compile the kernel with -ftrivial-auto-var-init=zero and verify downloaded files using pgp signatures. But it doesn't mean these things are irrelevant. Even your phone has selinux=enforced option set. Why do you think your pc is not worth it?
Yes, systemd modules depend on systemd, that's like complaining that a GUI application depends on X.
SystemD is not modular. Logind is just an executable that depends on systemD libs. Red Hat could design it to be init-agnostic(similar to elogind). But they didn't. Any assumptions, why?
What an average Mint user gains from systemd? A bit slower boot time? A bit more ram used? 50mb heavier system updates? What problems systemd solves? I use systemd, runit and openrc on different machines and I don't face any significant problems.
It doesn't, that's ridiculous, several distros don't use systemd and still have udev
Void uses eudev. Alpine uses eudev. Gentoos uses udev with patches. What non-systemd distros use vanilla udev?
There is an example: https://www.agwa.name/blog/post/how_to_crash_systemd_in_one_tweet