Re: Bug#676817: systemd and dovecot
]] Nicholas Bamber
Hi,
I would be most grateful if you quoted the way is usually done on email
lists.
> I would be very grateful if you could have a look. Andreas Barth has
> basically repeated the point I made in the third paragraph of my
> original post.
Yes, and you're both mistaken. systemd is not a normal daemon package,
it does not start any daemons, nor replace init merely by being
installed. Installing systemd onto a system is about as intrusive to
the system as a whole as installing nvi.
> Nothing you have said is really reassuring me. You talk about how a
> package needs something to make socket activation to work and
> sd-daemon.h is a way to do that. Well that file is available in
> libsystemd-daemon-dev, and the current package as a dependency on
> systemd rather than libsystemd-daemon-dev. It might be right but it
> does not feel right.
I would suggest you ask the dovecot maintainer why he build-depends on
systemd rather than libsystemd-daemon-dev if it is in fact for the
reasons I listed. I gave a suggestion as to why he would do so, as well
as a reason for why systemd.pc is not in its own package, but as I am
not the maintainer of dovecot and there's no way for me to actually
know, short of asking, which you can just as easily do yourself.
--
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are
Reply to: