Linux

5180 readers

35 users here now

A community for everything relating to the linux operating system

Also check out !linux_memes@programming.dev

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev

systemd Talks Up Automatic Boot Assessment In Light Of The Crowdstrike-Microsoft Outage (www.phoronix.com)

submitted 3 months ago by lemmee_in@lemm.ee to c/linux@programming.dev

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In light of the CrowdStrike-Microsoft outage/disaster that has been wreaking havoc on corporate Windows systems around the world since Friday, systemd lead developer Lennart Poettering pointed out how such a situation on Linux systems could be averted by leveraging systemd's Automatic Boot Assessment functionality.

System's Automatic Boot Assessment feature can allow for reverting to a previous version of the OS or kernel automatically when a system consistently fails to boot. With the systemd-boot bootloader and related tooling within systemd and leveraging the Boot Loader Specification, systemd Automatic Boot Assessment would make for much easier recovery in case of an incident like what happened with Microsoft Windows systems running CrowdStrike software last week.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Lennart Poettering is no doubt smart, but learning all the ins and outs of systemd with terrible documentation and half-baked solutions, and just "trusting" it to do everything from UEFI booting, immutable partitions, system imaging, networking, home directory and resource management, init and daemon processes, sockets, etc. using "INI-like" files... hmm, I'd almost prefer another global outage.

[–] Starbuck@lemmy.world 18 points 3 months ago (2 children)

Because documentation was so great for sysv and everything else back in the day…

[–] timewarp@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Sysv didn't have to have a lot of documentation. It was simple to understand what it did, and the underlying system was mostly shell scripting. It didn't try to be and do everything.

I don't hate systemd. I prefer it now for the most part. I really do think Lennart Poettering is incredibly skilled and intelligent. I am just frustrated that so much gets pushed without adequate resources and support to weigh what is production-ready, and what is bleeding edge. I've already had systemd bite me in the ass at least once where they made a significant unannounced change to systemd-cryptsetup. I had to go find answers by reading through pull request and GitHub issue comments, and it wasn't easy to find either. The community acted like it wasn't a big deal that it caused systems to no longer boot. Move fast & break things isn't the message that will win over larger companies.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 months ago

You are looking for a LTS

[–] superkret@feddit.org 8 points 3 months ago (1 children)

If you wanted documentation, you read the init scripts.

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The "self-documenting" crowd is back in boys.

Anti Commercial-AI license

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 5 points 3 months ago

It doesn't do everything. Systemd is broken down into parts. You don't need to use systemd-boot to use systemd-resolvd.