On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 6:06 PM, Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote:
> Heya! > > So I am thinking about some spring cleaning, and would love to remove > the following bits from the systemd package: > All this looks good to me. > 1) systemd-initctl (i.e. the /dev/initctl SysV compat support). Last > time Debian was still using that, maybe this changed now? > > 2) compat support for libsystemd-login.so and friends (these were > merged into a single libsystemd.so a long time ago). We are still > building compat libraries to ease the transition, but that was a > long time ago, hence I'd really love to see this go. Any distro > still using this? > > 3) systemd-reply-password – this is really old stuff used by the GNOME > ask-password stuff which was experimental at best, and never found > much use. Unless am very wrong pretty much nobody is using this, > and we can just kill this without replacement. Anybody knows a user > of this that I am not aware of? > > 4) Capabilities= support, i.e. the non-ambient and non-bounding-set kind > of capabilities. They are pretty useless, as fcaps reduce them to > nothing in pretty much all cases, which is precisely why the > ambient caps were created. I am pretty sure nothing uses this, as > it's not realistic to use this at all. > > 5) Here's the controversial one I think: support for booting up > without /var. We have kludges at quite a few places because we > cannot access /var early during boot. I am tempted to stop > supporting this altogether. Of course, this does *not* mean that > people with split off /var would be left in the cold. It just means > that they have to mount /var from the initrd, exactly like this is > already handled from /usr. > This would be particularly nice (and controversial for sure). I totally agree that this should be very doable though, as all the initrd infrastructure is already there. The way things are now with no /var at early boot is sort of idiotic I must say. Big +1 from me. > 6) The .snapshot unit type. These sounded like a smart idea, I am > pretty sure though nobody is using them properly, and they are > pretty hard to use. If anything like this should exist at al, then > probably as a concept of "transient targets", but not as a separate > unit type. Anyone knows any real users of this stuff? > > And that's all for now. Opinions? >
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
