Systemd BirthDate Merge: Conflicts of Interest (tboteproject.com)

by npongratz • 23 comments • 23 points
Read article View on HN

23 comments

[−] iugtmkbdfil834 42d ago
It was a long time coming, but it now happened. SystemD managed to do something that might give people pause over convenience factor. I am saying might, because while I am now actively planning ( until now I treated it as ideologically impure aspect of linux, but sufficiently useful to offset that discomfort ). DOB merge ( and how it was done ) changes that calculus by a wide margin. It is not even about DOB now. It is the full blown slippery slope with MS doing round 2 of EEE.
[−] withinboredom 42d ago
The mailing list doesn't seem to make it out into such a controversial issue. It's an optional field that doesn't require a real birthday.
[−] righthand 42d ago
The issue isn’t the field but how the governance system for critical software is non-existant.
[−] uecker 42d ago
It also has to be considered in light of the fact that Lennart builds a company for "cryptographically verifiable integrity on Linux".
[−] withinboredom 42d ago
Because someone added a new user field? Does that need governance?
[−] righthand 42d ago
When your software is the core piece of tech in almost all mainline Linux distros, yes it does require governance. However you may like someone being an authoritarian regardless of the “it’s only a user field no big deal” view and the next thing they change without governance for everyone you will be fine with also, even if you disagree. Again it’s not about the field.
[−] VladStanimir 42d ago
I don't see the problem with the systemd DOB merger, the DOB will have to be stored somewhere and systemd already has a place where user information is securely stored so they added a new field to the user database.

The alternative is not that no DOB will be stored is that it will end up stored in 20 different locations on the filesystem.

[−] jmclnx 42d ago
From the wayback machine, I could not get into the link:

https://web.archive.org/web/20260403141132/https://tboteproj...

[−] tzs 42d ago
The site this is on seems to be a bit questionable [1].

[1] https://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/1064706/ba8e449d224f5067/

[−] righthand 42d ago
Why doesn’t someone fork systemd and start reworking/taking out all the icky parts as well as destroying Poettering’s control over it?

Debian’s forced accepting of Systemd is finally rearing it’s ugly head.

I am glad I switched to Devuan earlier this year.

[−] sqidyyy 42d ago
The "DiRUG reform" link leads nowhere and I can't find that particular site neither on bmj.de nor the Wayback Machine. Is that an hallucinated artifact?
[−] Foxboron 42d ago
This just reads like a LLM trying to come up with a conspiracy theory around systemd.

It somehow got hyper-fixated on "three" for no particular reason and seems like it decided to harpen down that fact without explaining anything around it?

[−] beepbooptheory 42d ago
[flagged]