Re: Who's locking down the code?

[Marty <martyb@ix.netcom.com>]

On 10/27/2014 10:14 AM, Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis wrote:
> Στις 25-10-2014 20:30, golinux@riseup.net έγÏ?αψε:
> > On 2014-10-25 12:14, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> > > golinux wrote:
> > > > Would appreciate comments on this observation:
> > > >
> > > > "Look at the source code (while you're at it, note who are the
> > > > upstream maintainers of util-linux). Even they (so far) allow
> > > > compilation without systemd. It is Debian who are introducing systemd
> > > > dependencies even where it is actually optional in the upstream
> > > > source."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > If upstream is allowing choice, why is Debian cutting it off? Maybe
> > > > I'm missing something . . .
> > > >
> > > > golinux
> > >
> > > The fact that an executable is linked against a systemd library
> > > doesn't
> > > automatically mean you have to run systemd as PID1.
> > >
> > > This is especially true for the sd-daemon and sd-journal libraries in
> > > this case.
> > >
> > > Laurent Bigonville
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> >
> > I have heard that argument before.  I counter that it's about more
> > than PID1.  It seems that even having systemd libraries etc. is a
> > little like being somewhat pregnant - precursors to a little bundle of
> > joy to be delivered at a later date when the PTB see fit. In other
> > words, a trojan of sorts that will come to bite us. Sorry, not much
> > trust these days . . .  :(
>
> I tend to agree with you golinux.
>
> We'll maybe forced to use systemd, if we don't want to start uuidd
> daemon from the start, cause of this commit in util-linux, libuuid[1].
>
> [1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/util-linux-ng/msg09698.html
>
> Regards,
> -- Dimitrios Chr. Ioannidis

It may have started in 2009 with this util-linux message:

 Anyway, do we really need to support suid uuidd? What about to drop
 all this stuff and require that uuidd has to be started by init
 scripts only? What about to drop exec-from-library at all?
http://www.spinics.net/lists/util-linux-ng/msg05967.html

Debian bug report in June 2014:
   commit ea4f8845f0241c714f9487ece5bb6900fc18a9e0
   Author: Petr Uzel <petr.uzel@suse.cz>
   Date:   Thu May 3 21:01:59 2012 +0200

      libuuid: don't exec uuidd

      Executing the daemon from the shared library is not quite elegant
      solution. Drop this functionality and require uuidd (should it be
      needed) to be started from the initscript or by socket-activation.
      References: http://www.spinics.net/lists/util-linux-ng/msg05967.html
      ...
   The solution would be to ship the uuidd sysvinit script which
   would give a way to start the uuidd.
   This script creates the directory as needed.
   (Note: this script is already available in the current v2.20.1.
   See "misc-utils/uuidd.rc". The script is just not shipped in
   the current package.)
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=719759#10

Finally from link cited in the parent message, in July 2014:

   You now need systemd (socket activation) to use
   uuidd on demand.

I looked and did not find the script. I still don't know what the 
original problem was (although I didn't dig very deep). In any case I 
don't see how the script is more "elegant" than the original solution. 
Can anyone explain what's going on here?