On 06/10/2011 03:07 PM, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> I understand your desire to replace everything by systemd.
> I really do. syslogd, klogd, mount, fsck, and a dozen other things
> I forget or don't know.

You're exaggerating.

> Why does systemd link against libpam?
> systemd does logins now, not /bin/login or gdm or ...?

to implement PAMName= (man systemd.exec)

> libattr? Does it mean it requires filesystem which implements
> extended attributes? If not, why does it use libattr then?

systemd uses libcap. libcap depends on libattr.

> libwrap? systemd is a network application now too?

to implement TCPWrapName= (man systemd.exec)

> libaudit? What systemd has in common with audit?

Start and stop of a service is an auditable event.

> To be honest, I doubt the wisdom of implementing service manager
> as an init process. There is no inherent reason why it has to be init -
> you can run it as *a child of init*, and keep init very simple.
> Then, if service manager would crash, at least it doesn't
> take system down with it...

systemd does not take the system down when it crashes. It catches the 
signal, dumps core and freezes, but does not exit.

devel mailing list

Reply via email to