Re: I'm not a huge fan of systemd
On 06/07/14 00:10, The Wanderer wrote:
> Can you run systemd without logind or journald?
I can't quickly find an answer, so I'll leave answering that one to
Can you run logind without systemd or journald?
If you have something else that provides the systemd interfaces logind
depends on, you can run logind (and timedated, localed, and hostnamed)
without using systemd as PID 1. This is what the systemd-shim project is
intended to allow (but see below).
Can you run journald without systemd or logind?
I don't know. The question seems somewhat moot to me, since I've seen
people who like systemd in principle but think journald is a terrible
idea, but I don't think I've seen someone who likes journald but thinks
systemd is a terrible idea.
If you can, then why is it that libpam package dependencies which appear
(if I've understood the discussion correctly) to be about functionality
now provided by logind are pulling in systemd *as the active init
There appear to be two facets to this:
First, the dependency on systemd's interfaces is expressed as a Depends
entry of the form "systemd-sysv | systemd-shim", so as I understand it
"install systemd-sysv" ends up being the default method of resolving the
dependency because it's the first entry in the alternation.
Second, logind >= 205 has a further interface dependency on systemd
(logind <= 204 sets up cgroups by itself; logind >= 205 relies on
systemd >= 205 to do it) which the current version of systemd-shim does
not yet fulfill: