Am Freitag, 27. Juli 2018 schrieb KatolaZ: > On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 11:37:57AM +0200, Dr. Nikolaus Klepp wrote: > [...] > > Well, yes, but the wole point of removing libsystemd0 would be to get rid > > of anything systemd, not to magle the systemd sources to do nothing (which > > would be a futile efford). SSHD is happy with "sd_notify", cups needs > > "sd_listen_fds", "sd_journal_print", "sd_journal_printv", "sd_journal_send" > > but is happy with dummy functions. Xorg wants only "sd_listen_fds" ... and > > so on. Virtualy all binaries on my system are happy with just a hand full > > of systemd functions. > > > I must admit I am lost :) > > The whole point of having a nooped version of libsystemd0 is to *not* > have anything systemd at all running in your system (unless you are > also scared of the function signatures defined by the systemd crew, > since those are basically the only piece of code that would remain > from the original systemd code in a nooped library...). > > The alternative is to fork any package that links libsystemd0, remove > the dependenc *if at all possible*, and *keep it updated with > upstream*, which means also removing any further dependencies, and > keeping track of all the patches included by the corresponding Debian > maintainer. > > We have tried the latter alternative first, and it does not work very > well, unless you have a relatively large number of *maintainers*. I > need to specify here that a *maintainer* is a person who follows the > changes happening upstream to the packages he/she is maintaining on a > daily basis, and rebuilds those packages as necessary, keeping them > updated. And commits herself to do so at least for an entire release > cycle. > > Unfortunately, most of the great people that helped stripping > libsystemd deps in Jessie, just disappeared soon after (also due to > the relatively steep learning curve of the Devuan building pipeline, > which has been lately somehow simplified by d1h and other tools). > > This is not maintaining a package, and this is not helping Devuan in > the long run. It's relatively easy to strip the deps in a single > package, and then abandon it in the hope that "others" will take care > of it in future releases. Almost anybody can do that. The real burden > is committing to maintaining those changes at least for an entire > release cycle, better if more than that. That's what a *maintainer* > should do. > > If we don't have enough maintainers, we'll do without, and a nooped > version of libsystemd looks pretty much like the path of least > resistance, having the greatest impact with a relatively smaller > effort.
Ok, here's the part that I do not understand: Why nooping libsystemd (and try to understand that mess) instead of building a minimal (functionless) dummy? There are just a handful of programs (like elogind) that make extensive use of libsystemd and need extra care. The other stuff just uses a minimal set of functions - most just for logging. nik -- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA, CIA ... _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
