Re: Openbox systemd-free
On Fri 17 Oct 2014 at 12:50:56 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Vi, 17 oct 14, 10:16:45, Mark Carroll wrote:
> > Steve Litt <slitt@troubleshooters.com> writes:
> > (snip)
> > > I'll also try to find a systemd-free alternative to LibreOffice, and to
> > > Gnumeric (Gnumeric will be tough, it's actually a good program).
> > (snip)
> >
> > LibreOffice is enormously useful for Microsoft Office compatibility. Why
> > on Earth does it require systemd?
>
> It isn't. As far as I can tell[1] it has an indirect (via libdbus)
> dependency on libsystemd, which is *not* the same thing. Same with
> Gnumeric.
>
> [1] debtree --no-recommends libreoffice | grep systemd
In the first part of his post the OP says
The first task of my project is done. Openbox is systemd-free
It is actually extremely simple to install openbox without systemd. He
makes it appear as though it was a struggle or that it it requires
superhumn powers.
To repeat: openbox as a WM on Debian without systemd is simplicity
itself.
Having laid out one bit of misleading information he then carries on to
mislead with an implication of libreoffice being linked to systemd. Your
information is perfectly correct. I can confirm that libreoffice
installs perfectly well withouit systemd with openbox as the WM.
Then we have the claim that "Gnumeric will be tough". I suppose it will
be if you do not know what you are doing. For the record: gnumeric with
openbox without systemd is also easy.
I doubt that the OP will make alterations to the original post to make
his advice fit reality a bit better.
Reply to: