Yes, I understand what you explain about dependencies. The problem is that even if one takes the time and effort to find the actual dependency, then what?
A simplified example: Suppose linuxfirmware uses just a single function from amd-gpu-firmware because it was easier for the developer to do that, thus creating this bloat of “have it all”. Then, on top of that more functionality is added, making the removal of this dependency even harder. If that is the actual approach of creating dependencies (as it seems), then a whole army of code re-designers and re-organizers is necessary. Not only this is inefficient, but it also seems a sign that the approach itself is wrong (in the sense - impossible). If there are a few thousand develpers adding more and more (with dependencies), a single person or a small team cannot possibly counteract that. Also, where is the good old principle “do one thing” in all that?
To my mind, starting from a base minimum is the only possibility here (like with the minimal templates).
The definition of “strictly necessary” varies from person to person.
What do you mean?
And rebuilding every wheel for each person is what the devs cannot afford due to limited resources.
I am not suggesting that. I am rather thinking of something along the lines of how one installs e.g. openSUSE with options:
- Other graphical desktop …
(or options for e.g. Developer work, Office work - proper package sets, etc)
- Base minimal system (text console only)
If one is free to choose whatever one wants (package by package in advanced mode, considering dependencies) and can always add/remove later.
I wonder if a similar approach is possible in regards of dom0 itself. Currently, in Qubes OS we don’t have much granularity of choice. For dom0 it is all or nothing.
That’s why your efforts are appreciated,
What efforts exactly? The GitHub issue got simply closed, i.e. nobody is even planning to consider what I suggested. What good be such effort if nobody is interested? I would be happy to help if I know (and can do) what is actually necessary.
Are you a developer? I haven’t done any serious coding for many many years. The only programming I have done during the last decade has been a little PHP/JS/bash. If you can describe the procedure or give an example of what is necessary, I could probably look into it.
Take a look at […]
I am not sure I understand. You say Xen, but we are discussing dom0 here. Could you please clarify?
Regarding dom0 in particular, I have not seen any actual info about why exactly Fedora was chosen (I am not saying it is a bad choice). The “we have to trust something” is OK regarding “we need something”, but it is not an explanation why any other Linux distro (or e.g. OpenBSD or other) was not picked.
Of course I believe that approaching stateless is better than not.
What is “approaching stateless”?
There are just too many things that have higher priorities than switching distro in dom0. I think.
By “the above” I meant the somewhat misleading explanation given all around - that something which is not connected to the network is safe by design. This is a fallacy.
Also, the question here is not necessarily switching the distro of dom0. It is rather about improving the security of the almighty dom0 by minimizing it (using whatever approach may be suitable). For a security focused OS, isn’t that top priority?
BTW, I read that in Xen it is possible to have a system without dom0 at all. I wonder how that works and if it is applicable to Qubes OS. Do you know anything about that?