[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: systemd effectively mandatory now due to GNOME

On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:06:39PM +0200, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> On 10/23/2013 10:30 PM, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:

> > I wouldn't have any issues with that, but at least right now systemd is
> > for me not yet production ready (it seems to miss proper dm-crypt
> > integration - or at least all those use cases where dm-crypt makes sense
> > at all).

> > Of course I can install the package but don't have to switch init= to
> > it, nevertheless it seems that already this alone adds several things
> > (udev rules, dbus stuff and some things in the maintainer scripts) that
> > *will* get enabled.

> And does this cause any problems actually? Does your system no longer
> boot properly using sysvinit when systemd is installed?

> I don't exactly understand the problem so far.

The problem is the scope creep.  It's perfectly fine for
gnome-settings-daemon to depend on the dbus services provided by systemd;
but there needs to be a very clear separation between the dbus services and
the init system, and the systemd package should be maintained with this in

You should not get an init system installed when you install the dbus
services.  This is deliberate embrace-and-extend on the part of systemd
upstream, and Debian should not tolerate it.

The Ubuntu packages may provide a useful template for how this package
should be divided - with systemd-services providing logind, hostnamed,
timedated, localed, separate from the init system components.  A clear
separation will help avoid any accidental dependencies on systemd-as-init
from the systemd services.

> > So I guess the question is mainly,... what's the policy from Debian side
> > now with such cases?

> Well, Debian is aiming for full systemd integration with Jessie, so
> there is that.

No, please reread that mail from the release team.  It is a *proposal* from
the systemd maintainers to implement full systemd support.  The release team
have not said that they have endorsed this as a release goal (and frankly, I
don't expect them to do so; it's not the release team's place to decide what
Debian should use as its default init system, and to endorse such a release
goal would presuppose such a decision).

So "the systemd maintainers are aiming", not "Debian is aiming".

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: