2 ms·
But if they codify best practices, then they won't be able to invent "best practices" on the spot to cover their asses whenever somebody discovers some flaw in
by catalogia 7y ago
But if they codify best practices, then they won't be able to invent "best practices" on the spot to cover their asses whenever somebody discovers some flaw in their software.
Prime example: the "best practice" of not letting usernames start with numbers is invented on the spot by a SystemD dev to cover his ass: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-311900864 https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issues/6237#issuecomment-...
- tharne 7y agoof course systemd is so bloated and monolithic that it's hard to find and identify bugs and flaws in the first place, so it's win-win for them.
- Xylakant 7y agoIsn’t it shadow-utils that came up with that rule? And rhel/centos patching that out? https://gist.github.com/bloerwald/a482791395114fa82636e2ab207cdb11 https://gist.github.com/bloerwald/a482791395114fa82636e2ab20...
- catalogia 7y agoIt was never a rule, only a quirk a few other tools had. The kernel has always permitted these usernames; it is plainly systemd's responsibility to not shit the bed when it encounters such a username.
- kevin_b_er 7y agoThe example is because SystemD rejects POSIX as a standard. Whenever Pottering decides something is better, POSIX is tossed out the window.
- catalogia 7y agoIt's deeper than that. Rejection of POSIX is the reason SystemD is Linux only; Pottering rejects POSIX compatibility and gives the finger to anything other than Linux. But in this case SystemD failed to even adhere to the [non]spec of "what Linux supports."