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

Re: Bug#676817: systemd and dovecot

]] Nicholas Bamber 


I would be most grateful if you quoted the way is usually done on email

> 	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: