mirror of
https://github.com/YellowJacketLinux/lfs-buildscripts.git
synced 2025-01-23 05:52:21 +08:00
doc updates
This commit is contained in:
parent
37f557f41b
commit
1debcf6060
@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ have not seen researched.
|
||||
|
||||
If (and when if not currently) `systemd-resolved` with DNSSEC validation works
|
||||
smoothly and reliably it absolutely should be used in place of
|
||||
`/etc/resolv.conf` for DNS resolution of a Linux desktop.
|
||||
`/etc/resolv.conf` for DNS resolution of a GNU/Linux desktop.
|
||||
|
||||
Until `systemd-resolved` with DNSSEC validation works smoothly and reliably,
|
||||
the best solution is to run `unbound` in DNSSEC enforcing mode on your local
|
||||
@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ DNS over TLS (DoT)
|
||||
------------------
|
||||
|
||||
DNS over TLS is just like regular DNS except it uses a TLS connection to make
|
||||
the request and receive the answer.
|
||||
the request and receive the answer. DoT should not be confused with DoH.
|
||||
|
||||
DoT does offer protection against DNS injection attacks between the client and
|
||||
the recursive server it queries, but it is important to understand that DoT is
|
||||
@ -167,7 +167,7 @@ activity. If your system is configured to *only* allow DoT queries, your system
|
||||
will not work on a network that blocks DoT queries.
|
||||
|
||||
Honestly I just recommend desktop systems enforce DNSSEC but should avoid DoT
|
||||
and only use opportunistic DoT when if they really want to use it at all.
|
||||
and only use opportunistic DoT when and if they really want to use it at all.
|
||||
|
||||
Recursive DNS servers absolutely should use DoT when communicating with the
|
||||
authoritative DNS servers they query, however, even then it should be
|
||||
@ -186,8 +186,8 @@ default but users will be told how to enable it in opportunistic mode.
|
||||
|
||||
Until `systemd-resolved` works well and smoothly in DNSSEC enforcing mode, I
|
||||
will disable it by default. Users who want it of course can enable it. I really
|
||||
do not YJL to be a distribution that pushes technology not quite ready for mass
|
||||
adoption on its users.
|
||||
do not want YJL to be a distribution that pushes technology not quite ready for
|
||||
mass adoption on its users.
|
||||
|
||||
If `systemd-resolved` with DNSSEC support is not yet working well and smoothly
|
||||
when the first official YJL release happens, then YJL will ship with `unbound`
|
||||
|
43
THE_WHY.md
43
THE_WHY.md
@ -275,11 +275,44 @@ Google Noto fonts will provide decent coverage but probably are not the best
|
||||
collection of fonts for many scripts out there.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
To Be Researched
|
||||
----------------
|
||||
|
||||
A lot of hardware, especially modern hardware, requires binary blobs to properly
|
||||
function. These binary blobs can often be found in the Linux Firmware git at:
|
||||
|
||||
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/firmware/linux-firmware.git/
|
||||
|
||||
As they are binary blobs, they can not be shipped as part of a Linux kernel
|
||||
package because of the GPL but they can be shipped as part of a separate package
|
||||
and then loaded by the kernel while the kernel is booting.
|
||||
|
||||
Loading them by the kernel while the kernel is booting generally requires that
|
||||
they be placed into an `initrd` image that the `grub` boot loader knows about.
|
||||
|
||||
BLFS has a really good write-up on this in Chapter 3 but I need to do a lot more
|
||||
research on the topic *especially* since the proper way to handle it may depend
|
||||
specifically on the hardware that needs the blob loaded.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Controversial Design Decisions
|
||||
------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
At least I *think* these are controversial design decisions...
|
||||
|
||||
### Ease of Use
|
||||
|
||||
Ease of Use is not my biggest concern. Not everything needs a GUI tool, I do not
|
||||
think it is a problem for the user to be expected to know how to use a text
|
||||
editor from a console to perform some configuration tasks.
|
||||
|
||||
I am certainly not opposed to configuration tools that are properly written but
|
||||
for example, I do not have a problem with manual creation of the files in the
|
||||
`/etc/systemd/network` directory being necessary in order for networking to
|
||||
work.
|
||||
|
||||
Operating systems used to come with a printed manual. Was that really so bad?
|
||||
|
||||
### SELinux
|
||||
|
||||
YJL will not support SELinux. SELinux support is really the kind of thing that
|
||||
@ -323,7 +356,15 @@ collecting the data in the first place even if they claim to anonymize it, and
|
||||
when they do collect it, it should be opt-in with the user fully understanding
|
||||
the potential implications of the data collection.
|
||||
|
||||
That article is just but one example.
|
||||
That article is just but one example. Another example is FireFox defaulting to
|
||||
DNS over HTTPS by default. See thr section labeled ‘__DNS over HTTPS (DoH)__’
|
||||
in the file `SECURE_DNS.md` for details.
|
||||
|
||||
It is true that YJL could ship a version of FireFox patched to disable those
|
||||
defaults (or even remove the features completely) but that is a lot of work and
|
||||
also, the fact that the code is in FireFox and enabled by default to start with
|
||||
makes me very suspicious of what *else* is in their code that is potentially
|
||||
harmful to users. I just do not trust them.
|
||||
|
||||
YJL will package web browsers, but not FireFox (or Chromium as it seems to me to
|
||||
be just as bad).
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user