
Systemd's latest conquest: the 'su' command - mariuz
http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/open-sauce/69228-systemds-latest-conquest-the-su-command
======
erpellan
Just because something has a _de facto_ rather than _de jure_ specification
does not make it unspecified.

------
mangecoeur
> death of innovation for all functions absorbed into systemd

Not sure there was much innovation in 'su'...

> might come to the point where one has just systemd and the kernel making up
> a Linux distribution

I think that's kinda what they are going for...

~~~
sam_lowry_
Well, Ubuntu introduced a major usability change when it appeared.

------
dang
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10141715](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10141715)

~~~
JdeBP
And
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10140690](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10140690)

------
angersock
If the behavior was never fully specified (as claimed), then it might be worth
having this just to see what it breaks and what bugs it uncovers.

~~~
digi_owl
What it boils down to is that as long as you stick to users and groups, su
works just fine.

But systemd is using cgroups and pam to do session tracking, and using su
within that seems to break some elements of their tracking (or some concept
within it).

Thing here is that su is doing the job it has always done, so frankly it is
the systemd session tracking code that is in the wrong.

~~~
JdeBP
... as long as it is not abused.
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10162451](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10162451)

~~~
digi_owl
And again the issue is PAM, not SU...

------
olgeni
Not sure why it says "Linux/UNIX".

