On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 1:34 PM, Tom H wrote:
>
> You might not need to use all of the systemd tools but its tools
> aren't independent.
That is similar to how optional features are handled in many collections.
If you use some features, they might pull in other requirements but the
features themselves are optional.
>
> For example, Ubuntu patches logind in order to use
> it with upstart rather than with systemd.
systemd explicitly documented which interfaces they consider independent and
which ones they don't and I linked to the document earlier. Ubuntu's use of
logind is backporting + reimplementation of some interfaces using a shim and
they are moving away from it to systemd itself since the reimplementation is
lagging behind in features and functionality and the Debian move to systemd
made it easier for them to follow that path.
I understand and agree but nonetheless maintain that we shouldn't call
systemd a "collection of tools with a shared codebase where most of
the tools are optional" since the systemd executables aren't as
independent of one another as those of util-linux and coreutils.
Although you more or less hint at this with "with a shared codebase",
most people don't.
(I use Ubuntu 14.10 on my laptop and systemd 204 is available so by
the time that it's released systemd-shim might be relegated to 14.04
LTS.)