[TUHS] Re: Version 256 of systemd boasts '42% less Unix philosophy' The Register

["Åke Nordin" <ake.nordin@netia.se>]

On 2024-06-16 23:56, David Arnold wrote:
>> On 15 Jun 2024, at 00:18, Grant Taylor via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:
>>
>> It's my understanding that systemd as a service lifecycle manager is starting to take on some aspects of what cluster service managers used to do.
> I think it goes beyond this, and that systemd is just a convenient focus point for folks to push back against a wider set of changes.

As an example of where I believe evolution is headed, I'd like to
talk about the Elephant in the Room.

Android.

It has a Linux, and thus Unix, heritage. The parts of it that still
depends on libc enjoys the quality of OpenBSD code, so it is blessed
by some unixy simplicity. Yet regular users are so far removed from
anything unix-like that it might as well be Multivac or the Mima.

That it still has a file manager of sorts that knows the typical
locations of downloads or photos is one of the last concessions
to us "I know it's a computer, let me use it as one" types.
By default, its apps are sandboxed and isolated in their own hives
with their code (main(), library dependencies, media resources)
and data presumably sealed off from the rest of the file system.
Every code component is of course duplicated in every app. Each
new version of Android seems to remove yet another aspect of its
Unix roots.

It didn't start there, though. Once upon a time, chroot() was
a popular way to reduce attack surface area in Linux as well as
elsewhere. You had to carefully populate it with just the
dependencies that were needed. Containers followed, automating
dependency provisioning. Android and its app ecosystem  is just
a logical continuation of that evolution.

Ubuntu has promoted "snaps," a kind of containerized applications
that pretty much walks and quacks just like an Android app.
Maybe it'sjust me being stupid trying to make things work with
e.g. a snap-based version of synergy for keyboard and mouse
sharing, but to me it seems that they typically don't see much
of your file system, not to talk about any comprehensive view
of your /dev.

Quite a few distros seems to be headed that way. I'm probably
both deluded as well as occluded in my reasoning, but I strongly
suspect that the last generation of actively interested computer
users where a majority understood processor memory models, I/O
and interrupts is now largely promoted out of harms way.
"Add another layer of abstractions so we don't need to care
about such bullshit" seems to be the new call to arms.

That dbus, systemd and Wayland isn't worse than they are is frankly
an amazing success given the circumstances they were born under.

-- 
Åke Nordin <ake.nordin@netia.se>, resident Net/Lunix/telecom geek.
Netia Data AB, Stockholm SWEDEN *46#7O466OI99#