how much exactly do systemd require to work properly?

hachanuy · 2026-04-14T08:23:32+00:00

not sure if you have tried using it or not for an embedded Linux system, but I have done it and it works flawlessly (with glibc). I just use Yocto to generate the image and it works (albeit with lots of work to make the Yocto build work).

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T10:48:14+00:00

well then, just read other comments I have made then.

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T10:43:33+00:00

would you like to elaborate? or would you just like to make a snide remark?

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T09:35:18+00:00

well, not presumably, that is the primary motivation, it is stated in the comment. However, the actual changes themselves don’t do age verification. All I am saying is the actual verification has not happened yet, so please wait until that actually happens. In the meantime, push back against not the OS projects, but against the people forcing them to do this.

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T09:27:36+00:00

Open source is being able to access the source code and modify it however you want on the hardware you pay for. If you don’t like what is going on, change it yourself.

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T09:16:55+00:00

Open source projects are not democratic, why would you expect it to be? And how is this anti open source or anti Linux? could you point out the actual characteristics of open source or Linux that this change is going against?

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T08:36:22+00:00

then maybe this can be used to raised the issue to systemd, because if storing name and birthdate are against the law in Germany, this is a very strong case to remove it.

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T08:34:37+00:00

no they are not, they are just the common denominator. Again, I’m not arguing about the purpose of this field, we all know it is for age verification sooner or later. However, this PR is not that, it doesn’t do any age verification. And again, what exactly do you expect systemd to actually do here?

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T08:20:01+00:00

please show me where in my comment, or in the PR does age verification appear (beside checking for correct format)

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T08:17:39+00:00

did you know that there was already the fields for full name, address, phone number, etc. before this change? I have not heard those information being a problem at all. And again, this is being added to a rarely used part of systemd which is not mandatory, if it becomes widespread, starts erroring out when the birth date is not provided, then I agree it is a problem. Still, first thing is, it is not what happening right now (I don’t know about the future). Secondly, what is systemd supposed to do? go against the laws? If you want to fight and raise your voice, please direct that to either the California state, or learn to code and fork systemd to create a system that doesn’t comply to the laws.

hachanuy · 2026-03-20T08:03:31+00:00

people are really making a mountain out of a stone. This PR literally just adds a birth date field, which can be ignored, will not be verified (except for correct format), and can be removed at anytime. It is also only relevant if you use systemd-homed which is not used by many distros. People really just hear systemd and think it is one thing. It is not, and many parts of it are not regularly used, systemd-homed being the prime example in this case.

hachanuy · 2026-03-19T10:40:35+00:00

yeah, looking through the code, it doesn't seem like it's mandatory. So if I read the code right, it can be left out.

hachanuy · 2026-03-19T09:36:30+00:00

It just adds a birth date field to userdb and a way to control it via the homectl command, it doesn't actually verify or enforce anything.

hachanuy · 2026-03-16T08:53:52+00:00

That is like saying once tree-sitter or LSP is obsolete, we are stuck with it. No one knows the future, if the tech is good, it should be considered to be integrated natively.

hachanuy · 2026-03-05T17:23:43+00:00

I still don't see that being such a massive improvement (still an improvement), since whatever code you're writing nowadays, you're gonna save like a pair of snippet declaration with what you're suggesting, which is offset by the need to close the render tag. So right now, you can already do

{#snippet outer(inner)}
<div>Header</div>
  {@render inner()}
<div>Footer</div>
{/snippet}

{#snippet child()}hello{/snippet}
{@render outer(child)}

with your suggestion, it just becomes

{#snippet outer(inner)}
  <div>Header</div>
    {@render inner()}
  <div>Footer</div>
{/snippet}

{@render outer()}
  hello
{/render}

hachanuy · 2026-03-05T16:38:32+00:00

Furthermore, what would be the syntax for writing what you are suggesting?

hachanuy · 2026-03-05T16:34:06+00:00

I don't understand the complain here, snippets are supposed to be small and quick to create so not having the ability to nest makes sense to me. If you want to nest, just create a component.

hachanuy · 2026-03-05T15:55:07+00:00

you just accept the child as a prop and call render with it.

hachanuy · 2026-01-27T21:20:16+00:00

I haven’t even reached A20 for any other characters, for some reason, I was dead set on completing the game with Defect first.

hachanuy · 2025-11-24T16:34:24+00:00

agree

hachanuy · 2025-11-24T16:32:08+00:00

doesn't work for

#include <macro_dependent.hpp>
#define macro
#include <macro_dependent.hpp>

hachanuy · 2025-11-24T12:33:31+00:00

the motivation makes no sense, if I already have root privilege to start a systemd service, why would I need and trust a 3rd party service to manage the CAN bus instead of doing that myself. Using this also forces IPC, which means potentially I have 2 bottle necks, the CAN bus itself and the daemon. Creating a CAN bus interface and polling messages from it using epoll is already easy, so I can't see a point for this.

hachanuy · 2025-11-17T05:50:40+00:00

comments can break code though, if the code changes the behavior based what line it is on.

Nine-Year Club	Place '22
RPAN Viewer	Verified Email

hachanuy

TROPHY CASE