Web lists-archives.com

Re: pointless systemd dependencies




Hello,

On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 01:47:51AM +0000, David Griffith wrote:
> Could we start the process of identifying packages that have dependencies on
> systemd in some way that is are not actually required?

Nothing has been stopping anyone from doing this since the day the
first package in Debian required systemd. Have at it. Report bugs in
the Debian bug tracker. Use the "reportbug" tool.

However…

I don't think that you will find that many packages that currently
depend upon systemd where this is a real bug.

Do you have examples of such packages where the bugs have not been
filed yet?

Several issues:

- If a package works better/differently in the presence of systemd
  then a depend on systemd may be appropriate, if upstream doesn't
  want to support other inits. You can't generally expect Debian to
  deviate very far from upstream.

- A lot of packages depend upon libsystemd0 just to detect the
  presence of systemd but work fine without systemd-as-pid1. A
  dependency on libsystemd0 here is appropriate; it doesn't mean you
  have to run systemd-as-pid1.

- Some upstreams don't implement a sysV init script or have removed
  the ones they had, because they only want to support systemd init
  scripts. While it might be nice for Debian to expend effort to go
  further than the upstream author does, it's not always feasible or
  desirable, so a bug to (re-)add sysV init script support may end
  up as wontfix or wishlist for an indefinite period.

Between this and more complications I'd be surprised if there are
many packages which directly depend upon systemd-as-pid1 for no good
reason. But do report bugs for those that do!

Cheers,
Andy

-- 
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting