Bug#727708: init system coupling etc.
Josselin Mouette <joss@debian.org> writes:
> Le vendredi 14 février 2014 à 13:50 +0000, Ian Jackson a écrit :
>> Josselin Mouette writes ("Bug#727708: init system coupling etc."):
>>> In all cases, it is unacceptable to put the burden of implementing
>>> logind on non-systemd systems on maintainers of packages that just
>>> need the logind interfaces. If it is not available, software such as
>>> gdm3 will depend, directly or indirectly, on systemd as PID 1, and
>>> that will be all.
>> Firstly, I think the scenario where the required integration work is
>> not done is unlikely. But in that scenario, we have two choices:
>> (a) Effectively, drop all init systems other than systemd
>> (b) Effectively, drop GNOME
> This looks very much like a false dichotomy to me.
> You can have (c) GNOME depends on systemd.
> Same for KDE and Xfce, BTW, since they are going in the same direction.
> Desktop environments are not the only pieces of software in Debian.
> Having them depend on systemd doesn’t prevent you from using other init
> systems on machines that don’t have them installed.
Exactly.
I somewhat disagree with Josselin in that I actually do think this is an
unlikely result and that, at least in the short term, people will step
forward and find an alternative solution. I also don't think that
maintaining a 204-era logind in the archive for jessie if a cgroups fix
doesn't materialize is the worst thing that could happen, provided that
someone is willing to maintain it.
But I also don't agree with the idea that it's the end of the world if
GNOME depends on systemd. There are a bunch of other DEs, and there are a
bunch of other uses for Debian systems other than running DEs.
That said, I again repeat that I question whether it's worth having this
argument when there are concrete steps people can take today to ensure
that it is an argument we don't have to have.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: