Re: Proposal: General Resolution on Init Systems and systemd Facilities
Simon Richter <sjr@debian.org> writes:
> GNOME and systemd coordinate among themselves mostly, adding features as
> required for their use cases. As long as no one outside these particular
> ecosystems uses these features, we can just step aside and wait for
> wider adoption.
> The majority of packages we have in Debian either need no init
> integration at all, or will be content with "start this at boot" and
> "start this at that time", so they don't need anything beyond what is
> defined right now.
I don't really agree with this. I see numerous opportunities throught the
project in packages that have nothing to do with GNOME that would benefit
immensely from systemd features, particularly DynamicUser. There are also
more minor benefits in adopting the same mechanisms as other distributions
for doing similar things, such as tmpfiles.d. And there is the general
opportunity to move to a more declarative, configuration-driven syntax for
many things currently done via shell scripts, which will have small
advantages for thousands of packages.
I think we're not seeing those sorts of benefits right now because all
progress in this area apart from packages like GNOME that absolutely
require it has been on hold because of the challenging discussion
environment and general project uncertainty around systemd. We're
currently not taking advantage of a lot of really interesting
possibilities.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: