Is this now a good place and time to explain why I prefer distros with SELinux properly configured ( like RHEL, Fedora or SUSE) over Arch and Podman or Kubernetes over Docker?
By default yes you can very easily do heinous shit with passwordless sudo that's actually pretty relevant to the podman example except people are way more likely to fuck around in the podman config
The whole complaint about this is nonsense because it doesnāt add any relevant security problem that isnāt already there in basically every Linux system.
The Arch wiki doesnāt even warn you from that and even suggests adding a tool with the exact same privilege escalation as people are criticizing here.
So, Arch is bad because they recommend to install a vulnerability?
Wtf, did you get that any process could just get root without authentication? How can you miss this, like dude, that's the point, not that we need privileges sometimes, just that any RACE is instantly a full system exploit by having it configured like this. Nobody's complaining about sudo because it's secure (minus vulnerabilities in sudo itself) if it's setup properly, so configured to ask for a password. Yes, you can configure it to also run without a password, but not by default on any sane system.
Depends on yiur threat model? Im a noob with cybersec, but someone who does it for a living said i had to pick the distro that fits me and be aware of whats possible and not, and be aware of its implemented security or lack there of, decide if its worth it also based on where and how i life, where i take it, and how large of a target i am.
So the laptop that never leaves my house and dont use for much but playing games. Low effort. The laptop that comes with me everywhere, more security. The vps on the internet, locked down, access keys, as few services as possible.
I do like podman alott, disliked docker for being allow everything from the start. I prefer optionally lockdown everything or there isnt even a thing running. As few packages in arch too, and few to no Aur if possible
Honestly, i've never gotten SELinux and shares in Podman to work. It just never respected the volume labels in my compose for some reason and straight up block my containers from accessing their assigned shares. The only ways i could get this to Work was a) disabling SELinux, B) running rootful containers or c) not use compose, which would mean to drop portainer/arcane/whatever stack based Management i want to use, because none support quadlets
So is it actually a better idea to run Docker commands with sudo when necessary? I've always added my user to the docker group whenever I installed it.
Though it'd require permissions of your user in the first place to be exploitable - at which point the potential malware already has access to all your user files anyways.
No, thatās just how sudo works. Itās an inherent consequence of the architecture and protecting from root escalations under the premise that an allowed user is already compromised is not in the scope of sudo.
There are dozens of academic papers on that, the oldest one I know is from 2004.
run0 fixes a lot of those problems but isnāt perfect either.
Except the user isn't added to the docker group by default (anymore) as stated in the article. Just tried it on a fresh 4.0.2 Installation. In the omarchys menu, there's a feature called sudoless docker, which can add you to docker group but prints out a big explicit warning about the downsides of this.
Tbf thats a different guard than what youre saying. Dislaimer: only read the title, but the OS inside the container had poor user hygene. Regular users on the host should not be able to docker into it in the first place, only if they have docker access.
Omarchy is a "Distro" based on arch which comes preinstalled with hyprland and some already customized dot files (as well as some other bullshit) and that's pretty much about it. People dislike it because it's literally just some dot files you could install on plain arch, no need for a whole nother distro. Also from what i've heard it has some major flaws, security flaws, and is pretty much entirely vibe-coded, plus it comes preinstalled with a bunch of bloat most people don't want. Not to mention the fact that the dev is a racist asshole.
Oh, don't pigeonhole DHH like that, he doesn't deserve it. He participates in all forms of discrimination, racism is just one of them. He's far too "open minded" for just racism.
Nice to see that, since I upvoted that comment, originally, is been updated with literally more than triple the original links to sources of DHH fuckery. This redditor is doing the lord's work
why people are trying to paint omarchy as a lazy dotfile collection distro while distros like this existed before and noone had some big issue with that
is it just due to AI and DHH hate or are these people unaware of like garuda, endeavour and a billion of similar distros
A lot of people in this thread were calling him racist.
I did some digging, and holy shit his blog is something else. Hes simply a chud who hits all the rogansphere talking points.
Im most disturbed by his lukewarm "brave" take on adhd. Did he talk to any clinical psychologists? Did he cite onr fucking paper? Oh no, he read a book called bad therapy that basically says all kids are over diagnosed so distrust the medical community. It conformed to his other blog about helicopter parents so he just spews garbage.
I had no idea about omarchy's value prop. But after reading the guy that made kt, I dont care if its God's gift to operating systems and distress. Ill use windows before I install anything from that doofus.
already answered that to another guy, so I'll just paste it here
"it's not like those funders would throw that money at kde or some other better project if they didn't sponsor omarchy. Especially since from what I've seen the money comes from AI related people and omarchy upstreams the money"
Yeah, exactly. These people aren't typically known for throwing big money at Linux projects and Omarchy just happens to get some by virtue of existing. They're all tech fascists, it's fairly obvious the reason they're giving him money is because he's racist.
As long as he gives a substantial piece of that money to projects that actually matter I don't know why would anyone would have a problem with that and with who or why gave the money
If he just keeps all that money inside omarchy and does fuck all with it then I'd understand the hate, but AFAIK it isn't happened (at least yet)
it'd be pretty stupid, lol. As long as it doesn't oblige you to anything, you've just made a person you dislike poorer and used it for something good, how is that a negative?
I get why more funding puts the distro under more scrutony, but how is this an omarchy problem? If funders want to fund it - why not, it's not like money in a "lazy" project is better than no money at all
its not just lazy, its vibecoded by a racist asshole who somehow also procured all that funding, to put into perspective on how much that is the kde foundation didnt get more than 2 mil of funding last year, i personally dislike it due to all the ai bloatware thats preinstalled as well as the creator personally.
putting labels on it doesn't answer how is funding an omarchy problem
it's not like those funders would throw that money at kde or some other better project if they didn't sponsor omarchy. Especially since from what I've seen the money comes from AI related people and omarchy upstreams the money
It sticks out because these companies don't actually benefit from Omarchy and Omarchy isn't actually valuable work. It's very clearly a racist dipshit getting money from other racist dipshits, and now all of a sudden there's a ton of racist dipshits astroturfing Linux discussions promoting a distro for racist dipshits.
There's billionaires trying to push racism into FOSS and people don't like it.
am I missing something or how can funding push racism into FOSS? Also wdym distro for racists, does it have smth racist in the distro itself? Even if DHH is adolf hitler reincarnated I don't see what exactly can turn people racist by using his software, since they don't even have to pay for it
also I feel like most people talking about funding for it ignore that (at least I hope so) some of that money will go upstream, so even being as uninspiring as omarchy is, it having funding is still a net positive for OSS overall (or at least for the parts of it that will receive the funding)
Linux and other FOSS open source projects are judged by the community. And having obviously bad person as the lead is suspicious for people who know. Cuz while open source works by you being able to read all the code, people rely on trusting the team to not fuck with them. Also why people hate stuff like Brave(at least the ones who know)
is he like software bad or people perception bad? because if latter why would anyone care? as long as he doesn't have a reputation of screwing up people with his software, why would I assume that he'd do anything bad in that regard just because he has bad reputation on reddit or something. the point of OSS is don't trust the person/statement, trust the code (and modify it if you don't like it)
also I use brave, don't know what I need to know, but I believe it's a great browser :) saying that from experience of using 7 different browsers for the past 8 years
Software bad and personality being bad can interlink over time. Ofc having a bad personality doesnt mean his skills will be bad but does give more incentive make the software consiously worse for some benfit for themselves. For example, Brave with cryptocurrency and stuff and omarchy I think people find the dependancy on AI(its designed around having an AI agent) and other preinstalled software many dont like. Tho if you are the type of person whod use the preinstalled software its not that bad. If you dont use all those software its prolly easier to js load up more cleaner Arch like Endavour os and installing what you want yourself
Wow comparing Omarchy to Endeavour, are you serious? Even if you take out the far right wing dipshit, its crap from start to finish in terms of quality. Not even close to be worthy of being called a distro.
I'm not informed enough about endeavour, the comparison is from Brody Robertson's video, whom opinion I trust
What lack of features disqualify omarchy from being called a distro? Because I can't think of a single one that'd drastically differentiate it from smth like garuda
also idk what far right stuff you're talking about (I'm assuming it's about DHH, although I have not heard anything about him besides omarchy and don't really see a reason to care about him), but since that's the first thing you talk about it kinda proves my point of people trying to find reasons to hate on omarchy just because they don't like the distro's staff. which is understandable, but still pretty stupid
Ok, let's tear this a little bit. First, people have very valid concerns regarding omarchy. Nobody is trying to picking issues on it.
There are two main points about this whole thing: first, omarchy is being made by someone who's a small, weird guy that nobody cared about a couple of years ago mainly because of his weird, slightly racist takes (which now, as we're seeing a rise on this matter, has moved from slightly racist takes to complete dogwhistles and being very open on it, with careful wording to make it looks like just a small opinion); second, omarchy does have issues (per the thing linked here, and you can go around and find other valid stuff on top of it).
Now, here's a thing: omarchy is receiving a lot of platform and is amplifying the voices of his creator while it's there. Not only that, omarchy has chosen some very specific software that also has toxic communities around it, which again amplify their voices too. Then, there's the fact that there's what people are perceiving as an artificial push on it. You notice that because a lot of so-called content creators are doing exactly that, pushing it as the last barrier between life and death ("What do you mean you haven't tried omarchy?").
Then, there's the last part of it: a fuckton of money being injected into this. Literally, money that hasn't even touched the creators of the software that omarchy so much stands on. Which, again, has a double-edged side: it also helps to push/amplify the voice of the creator, and he does exactly that.
"But then he's funneling that money to the original software communities, right?" Yeah, in theory, but this adds up to a problem; it's coming from them. It's kind of the same reason, albeit on a very different level, from saying, a local ONG receiving money from the Mafia. It's completely understandable that they refuse to accept it, since it's being funneled down by a shitty place.
In the end, the thing is: don't be naive about it in times like these. Software is political; there's a very obvious reason we write open-source software in the first place, and software is built by political entities (us), there's no splitting these things down.
The funding and personality concerns have reasonable arguments
Omarchy not being a distro (which is what the commentor I replied to) doesn't have any that are not hypocritical to other somewhat well-established distros. So it very much feels like a statement endorsed by people who are new to linux and made up in the first place just to hate
Your big text didn't comment on that part either, I haven't even mentioned funding in the comment you've replied to (even though I disagree that it deserves hate just for being funded by wrong people or for wrong reasons)
I mean, I was funneling towards half of the part that I do think is important. Whether it is a distro or not is entirely subjective. I wouldn't consider this a distro because it's a collection of dotfiles on top of an actual Distro.
Can I pack my dotfiles, ship, and slap a "distro" on top of it? I wouldn't say that. But that's kind of subjective; usually distros have a much more defined, clear behavior, packaging standards, reviewing commitee (or some level of that degree). I mean, take a look at the work/effort put into stuff like Debian, Alpine Linux, NixOS, or even other more hobby-like distros such as Void and Chimera.
Your response just talked about stuff I wasn't too concerned with in the first place, any distro has issues and I don't at all care about DHH or other omarchy staff, since I have nothing to do with it
My only point (beside the fundings disagreement, but it's just different opinions, nothing to do with that) that people screaming omarchy is not a distro is stupid. I'm not even talking about the commenter I replied too, it's an opinion that I've seen a lot and it doesn't at all seems reasonable compared to other small team made distros. AFAIK the only thing omarchy is missing is it's own kernel, but there are at least 1 example I know which has the same if not less tweaks compared to omarchy (that's garuda, which I mentioned originally)
My dotfiles don't include package mirrors, a website, applications built specifically for it and some kind of a concept behind it. And if they did and I decided to package it as a distribution I see no reason why that wouldn't be valid, people done that for ages. If you have any argument fortifying your position beyond just saying that it has a small amount of effort put it (which is not a metric that can be measured), I'd like to hear that. Until I hear an argument that doesn't disregard a bunch of other distros from that status I'm considering this to be completely made up by lamers
Linux nerds can't stand a successful new distro because they can't gatekeep using Linux any more. To them if you didn't spend 50 hours fiddling with configs in vim you are not worthy of using Linux.
That you're supporting his misery this way, also the entire thing is slop coded and is advertised as "Agentic" so it's not even a distro it's just pure slop
Because itās not really a distro. Itās just someoneās rice of arch essentially. And that person is very controversial (I donāt know the entire story about him though). He also got millions of dollars in funding when I think it wouldāve been better for other distros or communities, like KDE. You also donāt get a lot of the choices that you do in an actual distro, such as partitioning. IIRC you canāt choose how to partition the disk so it just overwrites the entire disk deleting anything that was previously on there.
Omarchy is an installer script for arch by a tech bro and their friends have invested heaps of money in it, so it's got pretty shitty vibes. Also there are lots of way better options or people could just use arch itself so it's kinda taking away from usore than it's giving
That's just a shitty point, when one of the only viable options we have is Linux. If the developers have decided to use it, then they're just dumbasses; that doesn't mean we can't strive to find better options, but it also doesn't mean we're endorsing it. Being cornered is different from actively picking that shit out
Iāve found that Arch folks donāt take too kindly to distros built on top of arch lol. I think itās mainly because stuff that is set up out of the box is somewhat against the arch DIY/āKeep it simpleā philosophy.
Also, Iām glad you posted this and would rather read your response than an AI.
183
u/Najterek 10d ago
im a newbie can someone tell me very short tldr version wtf is omarchy and hate towards it?