Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Suckless Linux

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 2:19

http://sta.li/

It's happening!

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 2:49

But communism sucks. Why can't the suckless people see that? Why can't they see communism leads them right back to systemd? Why can't they see that other communists want them dead? It's like Yuri used to say, the communist agitators and misfits are usually the first to be killed by their fellow communist revolutionaries.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 6:21

I find it funny that they consider static linking as specifically more secure choice. dynamic linking had its vulnerabilities but if 'had vulnerabilities' meant 'will always be insecure' they wouldn't use a fucking linux kernel which had plenty of vulns.

dynamic linking allows ASLR which makes exploit development harder (you need to find - sometimes multiple - infoleaks and make your exploit recalculate addresses based on that). the article about limitations of ASLR they're linking to is completely irrelevant here as it discusses the inherent limitations of this technique on 32-bit machines while one of the goals of stali is to target x86_64. guessing a 32-bit number is inherently simpler than guessing a 64-bit one, it's simple mathematics.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 13:00

>>3
linux kernel is pretty good

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 13:08

>>4
but it had vulns. so if 'there are vulns in ld' is a reason to completely abandon dynamic linking, 'there are vulns in linux kernel' should be a reason to abandon linux, preferably developing a suckless kernel from scratch

Name: XML is Turing complete 2016-09-28 13:18

>>5
Even the GNU project can't produce a usable kernel, what makes you think suckless can?

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 13:22

>>6
I'm not saying they'll be able to do it, I'm saying their hardcore anti-dynamic linking stance is hypocritical in this context because there are more linux kernel vulnerabilities than there are dynamic linker vulnerabilities. also, the fact that GNU can't make a usable kernel says more about GNU than it does about kernels

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 13:43

>>7
I'm saying their hardcore anti-dynamic linking stance is hypocritical in this context because there are more linux kernel vulnerabilities than there are dynamic linker vulnerabilities.
It's also probably easier to fix vulnerabilities in the dynamic linker than to fix vulnerabilities in the kernel.

the fact that GNU can't make a usable kernel says more about GNU than it does about kernels
Not really, even Apple can't make their own kernel from scratch (OS X and iOS are both built on top of BSD). And the Windows kernel is an antique piece of junk that's only survived into the modern era by piling layer upon layer of abstractions on top of it to keep it usable.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 13:56

>>7
suckless is hypocritical? Tell me something new.
Just look at their ``suckless browser'' (surf).
It has a good and simple interface, but deep down it's webkit that's powering it.
Do they even try to replace webkit with something suckless? No, too much work. No sane person would write a web engine from scratch, is what they say. So let's just use a bloated piece of crap? They somehow think that's okay.

How can someone not hypocritical call their webkit+interface a suckless browser?

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 14:01

>>9
The actual suckless browser is dillo, but its too ugly to appeal to unix hipsters.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 14:03

>>8
keep in mind that Linus made more progress in half a year than GNU did during the whole 80s

>>9
yeah, this also pisses me off. hurr durr our browser is only x SLOC. well no shit sherlock, your code just draws windows and follows hyperlinks.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 14:03

Fucking dubs

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 14:33

>>9
What's so bad about webkit? Don't many webpages depend on its features? A replacement would have to support all those features, and would likely be just as boated. The problem is that the internet itself is built around bloatware, we'd need to totally change how webpages are made for a bloat-free browser to be feasible.

>>11
keep in mind that Linus made more progress in half a year than GNU did during the whole 80s
Yes, because he's one of the few people that can actually make a kernel. Most people just don't have that ability.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 15:42

Yes, because he's one of the few people that can actually make a kernel.
http://forum.osdev.org/ Thousands of people making their own kernels and OSes.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 15:54

>>14
Yes but how many of them can compete with mainstream OSes?

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 15:55

>>15 Thats because of CIA oppression and Microsoft shills.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 16:48

stali(n)?

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 17:01

Windows XP - pay once, use forever
Linux - install once, pay forever

there is no free lunch, unless it is paid by taxpayers.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 18:41

>>18
Windows XP is deprecated. Now it's:

Windows 10 - pay once, send all your data to the NSA forever
Linux - install once, keep the computer under your control forever

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 18:44

>>19
Intel Management Engine
keep the computer under your control
LOL softwaretards are so cute.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 18:47

>>20
The GNU project advises against using Intel processors.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 18:56

>>21
We're talking about Linux, not your shitty GNU.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 19:04

>>21
What other processors are there? ARM? AMD? Intel has stamped out all real competition and enforced its global surveillance at hardware level on everyone.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 19:06

>>22
GNU are the ones that care about "keeping the computer under your control". Linux by itself is just as free (as in free beer) Un*x-like kernel. And many standard versions of the Linux kernel actually come with proprietary extensions, and the most popular "Linux distributions" include proprietary user-level software as well. "Linux" is about convenience, "GNU" is about freedom.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 19:07

>>24
So what processors does GNU advise using? Some ancient AMD antiques?

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 19:08

>>23
AMD is the only alternative for x86, but Linux runs on many architectures. ARM is pretty decent as long as you don't need really high performance.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 19:14

>>26
AMD is not an alternative anymore

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3060666/hardware/how-amd-is-ressurecting-itself-as-a-formidable-rival-to-intel.html

Intel’s x86 processor market share was 87.7 percent the fourth quarter of 2015, growing from 86.3 percent a year earlier. AMD held just a 12.1 percent share, falling from 13.6 percent, according to Mercury Research.

Besides, even if AMD or anyone else were to become a competitor, they would probably install some analogue of IME just to keep the pace. Freedom doesn't sell, most people do not even care who's spying them.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 19:25

>>27
Then we just need to use something that isn't x86.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 19:37

>>28
This isn't about architecture. Nothing is stopping ARM producers from installing backdoors into their chips.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 20:21

>>24
free beer is a myth

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 22:25

>>29
Nothing is stopping ARM producers from installing backdoors into their chips
Pics or it doesn't exist

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-28 22:26

>>26
Ancient Intel chips are fine too.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 1:45

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 2:58

https://libreboot.org/faq/#amd
It is extremely unlikely that any post-2013 AMD hardware will ever be supported in libreboot, due to severe security and freedom issues; so severe, that the libreboot project recommends avoiding all modern AMD hardware. If you have an AMD based system affected by the problems described below, then you should get rid of it as soon as possible.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 4:58

>>1
CRRRRRRRRRUX

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 5:01

>>9
yeha then you got farbfeld which is complete trash compared to the famous L. A. Calculus SUCKLESS IMAGES

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 13:06

w3m is the suckless browser.

but it can't run javascript
exactly

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 16:51

>>34

If your son has requested a new "processor" from a company called "AMD", this is genuine cause for alarm. AMD is a third-world based company who make inferior, "knock-off" copies of American processor chips. They use child labor extensively in their third world sweatshops, and they deliberately disable the security features that American processor makers, such as Intel, use to prevent hacking. AMD chips are never sold in stores, and you will most likely be told that you have to order them from internet sites. Do not buy this chip! This is one request that you must refuse your son, if you are to have any hope of raising him well.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 17:49

>>32
Ancient chips are just that: ancient.

>>31
Just because it wasn't discovered yet doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

We need free hardware, not just free software. We also need a market for hardware jailbreaking.

Name: Anonymous 2016-09-29 18:04

>>38
Isn't this from that article about Lunix?

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List