Re: Survey answers part 1: systemd has too many dependencies, …
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 06/10/2013 03:21 AM, Michael Stapelberg wrote:
> > Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> writes:
> >> In this blog post, you tell that it's possible not to use all the
> >> components of systemd. Then, the immediate question that pops to my
> >> mind: what are *your* intentions then, in Debian (or, said in another
> >> way, what would you like to do if you where the only one to decide)?
> >> Would you like to remove some components, or keep them all by default?
> > I don’t understand the intention behind that question. Could you clarify
> > so that I can give a proper answer please?
>
> Let's say you decide. Let's say you set systemd by default in Debian.
>
> Then which component would you install, and activate by default? Which
> component will you make only installable if the user decides to do it
> actively (for example using apt-get install)?
That is an uninteresting option. There is no way we can afford to have two
different sets of features for PID 1 under the same name in Debian without
it causing support trouble we don't need. So, please assume that every
"optional" PID 1 feature of systemd will be compiled in, and that only stuff
that can be disabled at runtime might be disabled.
It would be best to enhance
http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/docs/systemd-dependencies.html with
information about what runs on PID 1, and what runs after fork() and how
critical it is.
Also, it is extremely important to track down the full library dependency
chain for the systemd executable that runs as PID 1, and include any library
initialization code found in the entire chain in the analysis, otherwise the
analysis will be too incomplete to base any decisions on.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: