[ale] systemd bad. Very bad.

[Lightner, Jeffrey]

The premise of your original post was flawed in that it seemed to imply that DNS without systemd (or even other utilities) don't sometimes have exploits that need to be addressed.  

Suggesting that a component of systemd MIGHT be exploited and that makes systemd a bad idea seems silly as hell to me.   I've patched BIND on multiple occasions and or having to change named.conf for to prevent various exploits long before systemd was a gleam in anyone's eye.

Based on your logic, no one should use OpenSSL because it was once vulnerable to Heartbleed...

If you don't like systemd that is fine but using this as your reasoning is a bit off in my not so humble opinion.

-----Original Message-----
From: ale-bounces at ale.org [mailto:ale-bounces at ale.org] On Behalf Of Joey Kelly
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 3:51 PM
To: Ale at ale.org
Subject: Re: [ale] systemd bad. Very bad.


> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 01:25:31PM -0500, Joey Kelly wrote:
>> One more in a long list of reasons why systemd is a horrible and 
>> risky
>> proposition: putting DNS resolution in your init system:
>
> You're right; putting DNS resolution into your init system is a 
> horrible idea.  Fortunately, no init systems -- systemd included -- do that.
>
> You have a lot more to learn.
>
>  - Solomon

systemd claims to be an init system. systemd-resolved is part of systemd.
I guess I do have a lot more to learn.


--
Joey Kelly
Minister of the Gospel and Linux Consultant http://joeykelly.net
504-239-6550
_______________________________________________
Ale mailing list
Ale at ale.org
http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo/ale
See JOBS, ANNOUNCE and SCHOOLS lists at
http://mail.ale.org/mailman/listinfo