Hi, d...@d404.nl writes:
> On 08-06-2021 00:46, Hendrik Boom wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 12:05:39AM +0200, Arnt Karlsen wrote: >>> ..snip "tech" justification of subversive systemd politics. >>> >>>> So in summary, there is no way of running cockpit in a >>>> non-systemd/Linux environment that I'd be willing to support. >> Most of the worries mentioed here seem a bit overblown, but still >> need to be considered. >>> ..found just 3 mentions of "systemd", and this gem in: >>> https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/c/cockpit/cockpit_243-1_changelog >>> "- Detect unregistered RHEL systems on Software Updates page" >> But I did look at those mentions of systemd. The one I found >> worrisome was the first: >> >> * Add smoke autopkgtest that can run in containers. >> Add a simple test of cockpit-bridge and the login page to ensure that >> packages have the right dependencies and contents, and that the systemd >> units are set up correctly to get a login page on >> https://localhost:9090. >> This can also run in a container and thus in Debian's CI and on all >> >> If systemd becomes an integral par of Debian's packaging system, >> it may cause us difficulties. >> >> -- hendrik >>> ..now, Martin Pitt does offer a good recommendation: >>>> For these I'd rather recommend looking at webmin, ebox, or similar >>>> project." >>> ..https://alternativeto.net/software/cockpit-linux/ >>> >>> ..to maintain e.g. webmin (https://www.webmin.com/ ) >>> support for cockpit, you may wanna look at these 2: ... >>> "https://packages.debian.org/sid/cockpit-bridge >>> Cockpit bridge server-side component >>> The Cockpit bridge component installed server side and runs commands >>> on the system on behalf of the web based user interface." >>> ...and "https://packages.debian.org/sid/cockpit-tests >>> Tests for Cockpit >>> This package contains tests and files used while testing Cockpit. >>> These files are not required for running Cockpit." ... >>> >>> ...and check systemd and cockpit brass thinking: ... >>> https://packages.debian.org/sid/cockpit-doc >>> "Cockpit deployment and developer guide >>> The Cockpit Deployment and Developer Guide shows sysadmins how to >>> deploy Cockpit on their machines as well as helps developers who >>> want to embed or extend Cockpit." >>> >>> ...against: https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/cockpit >>> and the possible potential Ken Thompson style hacks: >>> https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Ken+Thompson+style+hacks&ia=web >>> >>> ..and, who needs a compiler with systemd onboard? My guess is systemd >>> running as PID1, can be set up to launch such possible "Ken Thompson >>> style hack" attacks, all you need to do is hide them away in binaries >>> somewhere "neccessary" online, so these new Cockpit web admin user >>> systemd victims never understand them, even if they ever find out how >>> to read such C etc code... >>> >>> ..on cockpit and alternatives: >>> https://www.unixmen.com/cockpit-a-beginner-friendly-server-administration-tool/ >>> https://www.linux-magazine.com/Issues/2020/241/Cockpit >>> https://www.hostingadvice.com/how-to/cpanel-vs-plesk-vs-webpanel/ >>> https://alternativeto.net/software/webmin/ >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_hosting_control_panels >>> >>> ..cockpit is not known by Wikipedia: >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cockpit_(disambiguation) >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=500&offset=0&profile=default&search=intitle%3A%22Cockpit%22&ns0=1 >>> >>> >>> ..turns out ebox changed its name, and, it does not support Procmail: >>> https://zentyal.com/features/ >>> >>> ..webmin supports procmail. >>> >>> -- >>> ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen >>> ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... >>> Scenarios always come in sets of three: >>> best case, worst case, and just in case. > > Not hindered by any knowledge about system programming I am wondering > how much work it would be to implement a socket activation interface > without systemd. Although what I read about its design it is unnecessary > complicated. Using a tinylog component in systemd until syslogd is > loaded is one example of such complicating solution. > > Has anyone invested some time in analyzing systemd's socket activation > and mind to share it on this list or in email? When I read[1] Cockpit itself doesn’t eat resources or even run in the background when you’re not using it. It runs on demand, thanks to systemd socket activation. all I could think of was that inetd and xinetd have been doing that job for a (couple of) decade(s) already. The only other mention of systemd on that webpage is one in a longish "subset of tasks you can perform on each host running Cockpit" that says you can Inspect and interact with systemd-based services That all nice and well if you have any but doesn't seem to interfere with all the other tasks listed. [1]: https://cockpit-project.org/ Hope this helps, -- Olaf Meeuwissen, LPIC-2 FSF Associate Member since 2004-01-27 GnuPG key: F84A2DD9/B3C0 2F47 EA19 64F4 9F13 F43E B8A4 A88A F84A 2DD9 Support Free Software https://my.fsf.org/donate Join the Free Software Foundation https://my.fsf.org/join _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng