Re: Linux: concerns over systemd adoption and Debian's decision to switch

[Jeffrey Ollie <jeff () ocjtech us>]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 3:22 PM, John Schiel <jschiel () flowtools net> wrote:
> On 10/22/2014 01:30 PM, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:13:29 -0600, John Schiel said:
> >
> > > i was beginning to wonder how secure systemd is also.
> >
> > One of the 3 CIA pillars of security is "availability".  And if
> > it's oh-dark-30, figuring out what symlink is supposed to be where
> > for a given failed systemd unit can be a tad challenging.  At least under
> > sysvinit, either /etc/rc5.d/S50foobar is there or it isn't(*).
>
> Agreed, the "oh-dark-thirty" call outs will be harder to resolve but I'm
> sure some folks will learn to deal with it. It's new and changes the job but
> as was noted earlier, there is always change.

I disagree.  I believe that the features of systemd will make
"oh-dark-thirty" call outs easier to resolve, but only if you take the
time to familiarize yourself with the tools at hand *before* problems
happen.

But really, there's nothing new here.  *Of course* systems that are
unfamiliar to you will be more difficult to fix.  It'd take *me*
*forever* to fix a problem on the HP-UX systems at work, mainly
because I'd spend too much time figuring out where everything was.
However the guy in the cube next to me wouldn't have that problem...

To borrow Barry's automotive metaphor, this is like saying that
electric motors are bad because I only know how to fix gasoline
engines.

-- 
Jeff Ollie