3 ms·

It's also pretty hard to prevent installation of libc. It's part of the OS, like dbus and systemd. There are distros of Linux that don't use systemd. And I'm a

• M95D 4y ago
  Except when you say "Linux", it's just a kernel. Everything else is... not linux. It may be GNU, or a specific computer program that uses that kernel. The original post I replied to argued that Linux puts the user in control, unlike Windows or OSX/Apple. My point is that for the last 10 years or so, it has become increasingly difficult to avoid certain parts of a linux-based OS, such as systemd and dbus, that reduces user's control over the system in the name of convenience. I would like a Windows without scheduled tasks - no longer possible. In the same way as Windows does things on it's own, I would feel less in control if a NON-ROOT app could open a connection to a wireless network, or auto-mount a block device, or start a service/daemon, or change audio settings. It's less about how dbus or systemd is set up, but more about capabilities. I can't say much about how a Linux with those things installed could again be made secure, private and obedient to root user, because I never had them installed. That's not the point. I simply don't like what it CAN do. PS: I have 3 Linux systems. 2 of them run musl. It's actually A LOT easier to change glibc with something else than have a desktop without dbus.