Re: Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile
- Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2018 04:36:16 +0100
- From: Adam Borowski <kilobyte@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile
On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 09:55:44AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Hleb Valoshka <375gnu@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > Please introduce official nosystemd build profile so downstream
> > distributions can send patches to package maintainers with systemd-less
> > build instead of keep them in home.
> If this is about avoiding linking with libsystemd, I think this is
> unbelievably silly and a completely waste of maintainer time and emotional
Yeah -- and, unlike most people in this thread, I do maintain a repository
which does that:
deb https://angband.pl/debian nosystemd-buster main
deb-src https://angband.pl/debian nosystemd-buster main
(instructions and key at https://angband.pl/deb/archive.html)
The only reason to avoid libsystemd0 is a cheap way to make sure systemd
paths are not used; some packages (I forgot which) have regressions when
compiled with systemd support as they detect its presence at compile time
rather than runtime.
> I'm one of the people who has been advocating for continuing to support
> systems without systemd running. I think that's both meaningful and
> important. Avoiding linking with a shared library that does nothing when
> systemd is not running is neither meaningful nor important. Please do not
> squander other people's good will on trivia like this.
While libsystemd0 is indeed harmless, there are cases where such a build
profile would be worthwhile:
* utopia stack (policykit and friends) which have a hard dependency on
* dependencies on libpam-systemd (including "mere" Recommends, which make
apt force an init switch or abort an upgrade without a workaround obvious
to an user who doesn't know what to look for)
On the other hand, rebuilding with a build profile is useful only for
derivatives. What about looking for a solution that would help users of
unmodified Debian instead?
-shim is moribund (and never worked right even when it was maintained),
thus installing it on systems with modular inits is damage. I believe this
is the problem that should be solved first -- because all non-trivial cases
mentioned above use logind or an equivalent, and to implement a profile you
need to know what alternate dependency to use.
The name I hear the most is elogind, but other options also get mentioned.
It'd be good if someone more knowledgeable could say more; I think multiple
Debian derivatives are experimenting here.
Once such a solution is chosen, implemented and tested, only then it'll be
time to fix dependencies -- inside Debian rather than some derivative.
// If you believe in so-called "intellectual property", please immediately
// cease using counterfeit alphabets. Instead, contact the nearest temple
// of Amon, whose priests will provide you with scribal services for all
// your writing needs, for Reasonable And Non-Discriminatory prices.