I did hear that one of their newer versions does use eBPF, but I haven’t even remotely looked into it.

https://nondeterministic.computer/@mjg59/112816011370924959

I don’t think any of the major distros do it currently (some are working twards it tho), but there are ways (primarily/only one I know is with systemd-boot). It invokes one of the boot binaries (usually “Unified Kernel Images”) that are marked as “good” or one that still has “tries left” (whichever is newer). A binary that has “tries left” gets that count decremented when the boot is unsuccessful and when it reaches 0 it is marked as “bad” and if it boot successfully it gets marked as “good”.

So this system is basically just requires restarting the system on an unsuccessful boot if it isn’t done already automatically.

Accent colors are coming with GNOME 47.

I dunno, I don’t have a camera feed into your life. But considering that is the first thing you respond to a clarification it most certainly wouldn’t surprise me if you did.

I dont think home directory files should handled by something named tmpfiles.

The only reason its still called tmpfiles is because of backwards compatibility

There were talks a few years ago about changing sd-tmpfiles name but it was decide not worth it due to the churn and bikeshedding it would cause.

sd-tmpfiles is generally used to create, modify (e.g. permissions) and remove directories on the system. The home.conf is intended for systems that only ship /usr/ (e.g. containers) to create /home/ and /srv/ as a separate subvolume on btrfs

This is a proposal by people funded by companies that would provide the services for this (https://balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/who-benefits-inside-the-eus-fight-over-scanning-for-child-sex-content ).

A lot of actual politicians oppose this https://tbbacherle.eu/2024/06/18/open-letter/

The BSOD really isn’t something to be mad at, it actually in theory is good but there is only so much you can do when a kernel panics. What you should be mad at is shitty drivers causing BSODs

which definitely seems out of scope.

Doesn’t seem out of scope for a system and service management suite. Like, the timeperiod where systemd was “just an init” was relativly brief (like half a year).

The case is: You switched to it before it was “old-old-stable” and haven’t updated.

Causes for this are likely:

• Software hasn’t been tested on new version
• Software hasn’t been updated to work on new version
• Needs revalidation for some specific certification
• Lazy

(I think that’s their goal, either ads or no watch)

They should test this much more often and frequently. Unlike Gnome, KDE do actually care about their users, not just about themselves.

It’s not like GNOME is the only outlier here (for the specific icon problem sure), someone on the linux subreddid also posted this screenshot https://imgur.com/a/1ELtsJb. It seems to really just be that KDE apps kinda struggle out side of KDE. And most of the GNOME devs do care about the users as well, just they also care that their apps look as intended.

It’s been a thing I personally have been wondering why this is how it is for a while. Personally I like most of the GNOME stuff, but this decision has always stood out as odd.

But then again I almost always use ctrl+w or alt-f4 to close apps, so I am mostly unaffected.

Just a minor clarification/correction: the “or later” part also depends on the license per se. There is a GPL-3.0-only and a GPL-3.0-or-later. Usually you’ll find something like “or at your option any later version.” if that is the case, but by default you should expect the GPL-3.0-only to apply.

doas is relativly simple (a few hundred LOC), especially compared to sudo. The main benefit of run0 over doas is that it isn’t a SUID binary, they are similary complex.

Basically. systemd-run was already able to do it, all that really changed is the interface for it. The change to run.c in the patch itself was <400LOC, and the entire patch was <1.4k lines with most being docs, tests and utils for coloring the terminal.

I don’t understand how this is any improvement over pkexec

That has the same problem as sudo: the SUID bit is set for it.

The fact that run0 uses polkit is more of a byproduct that this kinda authentication is already done with polkit all over the place in systemd. You can have individual subcommand accessible to different users (for example everyone can systemctl status, but systemctl reboot needs to be in the wheel group) which is why its generally used within systemd already. And it wouldn’t surprise me if again you can do it with this as well, limiting what commands can unconditionally run, need prompt or are completely blocked.

This has already been possible, the patch modifying run.c to be able to do this is not even 400 lines long and was mostly just exposing its feature in a different way. (the entire patch was <1.5k lines, with most being docs, tests and a bit of plumbing for the colored terminal)

As the other comment said, no. But I’ve had the idea and will to at some point write a edit script (that I can just set EDITOR= to) that would just choose one of the first common editors. That could in theory have a -0 option to run as root (there also probably looking through run0, doas, sudo and su). Not the editor, but doing the editing on a temp file and then copying with root