mholiv

Bro. This is the fediverse. Don’t crap where you (we) live.

It’s a good rule for life. :)

But looms at his little puppy dog face. :3

You can if you want to. But I don’t think that is best practice. The idea of quadlets is the bring Linux norms to containers. You contain and manage all permissions for that container in that user.

I personally have completely separated users and selinux mls contexts for each container group (formerly docker compose file) and I manage them thusly. It’s more annoying but it substantially more secure.

This being said I think you can do it as root. I think this might work but I am not certain sudo systemctl --user -M theuser@ status myunit.service

Are you placing your service files in ~/.config/containers/systemd of the home dir of the user you want them to run as?

Here is a link: https://linuxconfig.org/how-to-run-podman-containers-under-systemd-with-quadlet

Not true. I run them rootless on my server as we speak. :)

The point is, that the answer is 0% by any reasonable metric. I don't think any more is to be gained here given the question dodge.

So I will say good bye and best of luck again.

Ok. I have one question then. I think we can come to a clear resolution with it.

Debian GNU/kFreeBSD, what percentage is it Linux?

It includes 100% the apps, system tools, GUIs, and libraries that you associate with Linux. It also has 0 lines of Linux code in it.

If you can justify that it is above >0% Linux I will use your definition of operating system going forward.

But we can agree that there are upper and lower limits though. And I believe that we can now agree that system utilities and system libraries are outside of that limit. Just because the edge are fuzzy, don’t mean we can’t come to any conclusions at all.

Any now stepping way way back. I think we can now agree that Fedora, Ubuntu and other distros run the same operating system. That operating system being Linux.

That’s ok! I was just trying to help you see the difference. You do now. It’s a win/win. There was a reason why I kept on brining up Debian GNU/kFreeBSD. It really highlights the difference.

You’re gunna do you and use your own definitions and I respect that. But the first line from the page is

Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is a port that consists of GNU userland using the GNU C library on top of FreeBSD's kernel, coupled with the regular Debian package set.

It is literally GNU userland using the GNU C library on top of FreeBSD's kernel, coupled with the regular Debian package set

You can say Debian GNU/kFreeBSD is BSD system tools with a Linux kernel but you would be evidently and clearly wrong.

Anyways. I wish you well. Best of luck.

If you define it that way you are right. Yah. But the common understanding is a bit different than yours.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

Really great read.

I urge you to take a look at https://www.debian.org/ports/kfreebsd-gnu/ It’s the exact same utilities and everything but a completely different kernel. It really highlights the difference here. How would your definition account for this?

Would Debian GNU/kFreeBSD be 50% Linux, 50% FreeBSD under your definition even though it has no Linux code? It has all the system libraries and system utilities that you associate with Linux.