On 26 August 2014 10:43, Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
-- On Tue, 26.08.14 14:55, Vít Ondruch (vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >>>> Just to be clear, systemd-libs is in minimal build root already, so I am
> >>>> not complaining about systemd-libs package, but about systemd package.
> >>> What's the rationale here? I mean, we have so many dependencies, if you
> >>> want to minimize them, you have a loooong way to go...
> >> Someone has to start somewhere. It is annoying to install several
> >> packages, when you expect that only one should be installed. And by
> >> coincidence, I met several of systemd dependencies during short period
> >> of time.
> > What I am not getting: what's the point? I mean, systemd is not exactly
> > an optional package in Fedora.
> >
> > You are asking people to split their packages in two, but what's the
> > real reason for that? If the systemd package isn't optional anyway, why
> > is this the dep you start with and asking people to complicate things
> > for?
>
> Isn't it optional? I am using mock and can build probably every rubyI am not doubting that one can minimize things, and that currently
> package without *systemd* package installed into the build root (I am
> not speaking about *systemd-libs*). But once I install one of man,
> subversion or rsync packages, systemd is suddenly pulled in, why? Why it
> should be?
systemd ends up being into the build-root quite often. I am just
wondering what the big deal is.
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?
Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
