http://linux.slashdot.org/story/15/0...-functionality
Many seem not to be happy, myself i have used su for over 20 years without issue. I hope LP's replacement works as well.
What do you all think?

It's not a replacement, it's an alternative -- `su` will still be available.

I haven't tried it yet but I may switch over to Arch [testing] to try it out (or wait a few days), it looks interesting.

--edit nevermind

Someone, or several, people out there are missing some fundamentals in their education. Eloquently summed up in the following statement.

First it is important to emphasize the value of simplicity and elegance, for complexity has a way of compounding difficulties and as we have seen, creating mistakes. My definition of elegance is the achievement of a given functionality with a minimum of mechanism and a maximum of clarity.

When, not if, this massively complex system(d) gets exploited, the resulting earthquakes in the community will be a true popcorn moment.

Personally, I don't understand half of the reasoning behind the decisions that are made over there. I mean, udev replaced a system and didn't bother solve any of it's predecessor's problems. This is part of the reason why Steam machines won't have a sleep function. Valve can't make device rediscovery reliable.

1 members found this post helpful.

as i posted on /.
there is no ambiguity with "su " and "su -"
they do different things for different jobs

if i do not need to be in /root then i do not use "su -"


PS.
for those that do not know "su -" is a typing short cut for this command -- " su -l root "



the system D and System V issue is a bit complex and a bit simple

for 95+ servers "D" is not needed
but
for 95+% HOME and Office "D" is needed most of the time

BUT it is adding a TON!!! of complexity on top of things

BUT also solves things that get VERY complex

like setting up Arch and MANUALLY organizing the int system on a group of machines that WILL see HEW!!! and different hardware all the time ( like at HOME!! )

Well, my "popcorn moment" statement aside, this warring over systemd does little to help Linux. Development and politics really shouldn't be mixed. I think once a truly level headed project appears that competes, feature-wise, with systemd that the argument will die down. Especially if what appears adheres to KISS, POSIX, etc.

Simply another "innovation" from the person who believes:
Alsa is broken, because it is "old".
Linux is broken, because it is inferior to Windows great design.
The BSDs are legacy systems.

Is anyone surprised by his latest revelation? He is a young person who has been given the task of "fixing" a system he does not understand and believes it is not necessary to learn about the system he is "fixing" before screwing around with it. He foolishly believes simplicity is not modern and the more complicated something is the better it is. There will be many more changes like this. I for one, shall enjoy the entertainment as I watch from across the fence.

2 members found this post helpful.

Well, I agree when it comes to SysV. I think making standard the addition of a process watchdog was definitely necessary. And maybe some interaction between a watchdog and initd would have been beneficial. But, did it need to be rolled into a completely new Init replacement? Probably not. Hardware enumeration needed some work and, unfortunately, the replacement has fallen off the horse and lost its saddle.

But, as far as "old" and "legacy" go... Sometimes that is the case and sometimes it is not, and age has little to do with it. The screwdriver and socket-wrench are both old designs, but are not obsolete. The POTS system is definitely reaching a "legacy" state, but is still useful. The telegraph wires that still run along side railroad tracks in the Midwest are definitely old and obsolete, as are stock automobile carburetors, even though both of these worked fine at the time.

Now, getting back to the point... The biggest issue with systemd has little to do with its internal workings. No, the biggest issue is that the creators don't seem to care what kind of collateral damage they cause. Putting a big chip on your shoulder is only going to earn you enemies.

Tell that to Poettering. Read the shit he has written about ALSA. ALSA has been used since the mid-90s. Linux could not advance, until ALSA was replaced by a modern audio stack. Luckily, Windows has a wonderful design that he could base Pulse Audio on. I am not making it up. That is his belief. Therefore, it is not a surprise that he considers BSDs to be legacy. They adhere much more closely to Unix principles than Linux does, and Unix is ancient. su is just another case of the same nonsense. It is a relic from the ancient days of Unix. So Saint Lenard will save Linux by replacing it with something from the reservoir of his genius. If only the superior operating system called Windows had something similar for him to copy. That way he would not need to disturb his tranquil genius and rub a few brain cells together.

2 members found this post helpful.

machinectl shell is neither absorbing su, nor replacing it. It provides functionality that su simply doesn't have. Excerpt from the machinectl manpage:Note that this excerpt only speaks about what happens when the command is invoked without arguments, machinectl additionally is able to start the new shell in a new session on any of the containers running on the machine it is launched from.

This thread is being closed. Systemd is a problem subject that we at LQ do not need nor feel is a subject to be discussed here.
"Another Systemd yes-or-no thread which we shouldn't have?"

If you have a problem with this then please contact admin via jeremy@linuxquestions.org.

1 members found this post helpful.