Systemd 232 Adds ProtectKernelModules, RemoveIPC, Other New Options

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Systemd 232 Adds ProtectKernelModules, RemoveIPC, Other New Options

Lennart Poettering has announced the release of systemd 232 and as usual this new release is packing a significant amount of new features...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Systemd-232-Released

[sirblackheart]

Any news on the mDNS integration?

[GraysonPeddie]

Curious: Has there been systemd 1, systemd 2, systemd 3, etc.? When was the last time systemd 216 been released?

[tg--]

There certainly has been, and it's not actually hard to find: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/releases/tag/v1
Before the question comes up: systemd made a huge jump from v37 to 174 or so; this was not due to plain evil or arrogance, it was simply udev and systemd repositories being merged, and systemd adapting the udev version after, to not cause any long term problems with udev version checks.

[rmoog]

uhm, did they really just move /boot/efi to /efi?
is that not going to be 'problematic' to say the least?

EDIT:
/efi will be used as the mount point of the EFI boot partition, if the directory is present, and the mount point was not configured through other means (e.g. fstab). If /efi directory does not exist, /boot will be used as before. This makes it easier to automatically mount the EFI partition on systems where /boot is used for something else.

fair enough i suppose.
but who decided /efi was a great idea?
or rather /boot/efi was bad. since when is /boot/ not used for boot.. >looks confused<

Next thing we know they'll deprecate /etc/fstab like OSX did.

[unixfan2001]

Gods! A new systemd release with ever more features?
Think of the children! Will no one think of the children?!

[starshipeleven]

or rather /boot/efi was bad. since when is /boot/ not used for boot.. >looks confused<

In quite a few systems (like for example for encrypted partitions) you keep the (signed) kernel image in the efi partition and set EFI vars for booting it directly (with SecureBoot or similar kernel signature checks), so the /boot folder contains only from the /efi folder for the mount point, and that's kinda redundant.

I assume that this is another nudge from our Lord and Saviour Lennart Pottering towards their "ideal linux system" (where /boot has no real reason to exist anymore as you don't need a folder for bootloaders/kernels with EFI as there is a whole EFI partition for that).

Btw, Gummiboot (now called systemd-boot as it went under the Systemd project umbrella) is a simple and text-only EFI bootloader that scans the EFI partition for bootable images and boots them, for example. It has only FAT drivers (can read only EFI partition), so it needs no /boot folder.

[edmon]

don't have systemd. it will eat itself.

[edmon]

don't hate not have

[pal666]

Curious: Has there been systemd 1, systemd 2, systemd 3, etc.?

sure it had. https://github.com/systemd/systemd/releases/tag/v1

When was the last time systemd 216 been released?

https://github.com/systemd/systemd/releases/tag/v216
20 Aug 2014