On Fri Jan 23 2015 at 9:43:02 AM Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 21.01.15 12:21, Jaroslav Reznik (jreznik@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> Systemd contains many binaries and depends on a fairly large number of
> libraries. Packages which carry systemd units currently have to depend on
> systemd (through %post, %preun, %postun macros used to install and uninstall
> systemd units), which grows the dependency tree and increases the size of
> minimal installs.
>
> With this proposal systemd-units subpackages will be split out again:
> systemd-units
Really not a fan of this, but you are proposing here to reintroduce a
"-units" package again, and it will container directories and
binaries, but no actual units? Did I get that right?
Like Kay I think a "systemd-filesystem.rpm" that owns the dirs would
be a better idea... In particular as the systemctl invocations are all
suffixed with "|| : > /dev/null 2> /dev/null" (at least the ones done
via our macros), and hence should become NOPs if systemd itself is
missing...
systemd-filesystem sounds like a good idea. As for this proposal -- while it might reduce the size of the buildroot used to build packages depending on systemd-related macros, what would the effect be on minimal installs -- don't they include systemd anyway?
--
Michel
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
