On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 1:38 PM, Chris Adams <li...@cmadams.net> wrote: > Once upon a time, Stephen John Smoogen <smo...@gmail.com> said: >> So after looking at several different container images kickstarts I notice >> they all seem to remove systemd as it is provided by the base systemd of >> the system. I don't know if that is the correct method or not, but seems to >> be the common practice. So if various services end up relying on systemd >> and would be removed in making an image.. what is the proper method? > > Yeah, saying a spreading systemd dependency is okay because "Fedora uses > systemd" is just IMHO a lazy excuse. There are deployments like > containers that _don't_ use systemd, and don't want to pull it in.
Yeah, that's a fair point. > There is no excuse for something like rsync depending on systemd. The > majority of rsync usage for most system admins and such (deployment, > backups, etc.) does not use the rsync-as-a-service setup, but is run > over SSH (usually with keys). I use rsync on the desktop all the time, > and I certainly don't run it is a service there. The only time I've run > the rsync service was when I ran a public Fedora mirror server. The > rsync-as-a-service either should be split into a separate subpackage, or > a common package like filesystem should provide the requisite > directories. > > Looking at the rsync packaging, it includes the standard (macro provided > I believe) postinstall/preuninstall/postuninstall scripts that also call > systemctl, so in this case, the dep is not just on the directory. So, > the practical solution is to split rsync into two packages, with an > rsync-service subpackage that has all the systemd integration. Would you be willing to craft a patch and send it to the rsync maintainer to do that? josh -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
