On Thu, 2015-12-17 at 16:13 -0800, Brendan Conoboy wrote: > On 12/17/2015 01:43 AM, Harald Hoyer wrote: > > For docker containers, or containers, which don't want systemd, the current > > "Requires: systemd" in a lot of packages is preventing building a minimal image. > > > > To improve the situation, we could make use of the new rpm weak dependencies. > > So the > > > > Requires(post): systemd > > Requires(preun): systemd > > Requires(postun): systemd > > > > would become > > > > Recommends: systemd > > OrderWithRequires(post): systemd > > OrderWithRequires(preun): systemd > > OrderWithRequires(postun): systemd > > > > With this in place, kickstart files could omit systemd. > > > > The downside is: > > - if systemd is installed afterwards, the %post scripts do not trigger > > - packages, which need systemd-tmpfiles or systemd-sysusers could not be converted > > > > If systemd is removed before the other packages, I don't see a problem. > > There are only leftovers in /etc/systemd. > > > > To prevent having a non-bootable system (not container), we could let the > > kernel.spec have a Requires on systemd. > > > > Comments? Please discuss. > > I haven't seen a lot of downside brought up in this thread. If the > only objections people have is that it doesn't facilitate their > personal use cases those don't seem like real objections. Is anybody > going to be really negatively impacted by such a change? > > For my part I'd like to see this happen, not just for packages > requiring systemd, but for all packages where "Requires" is really > stronger than necessary. Now that we have soft dependencies it would > be nice to go through and move to Recommends where software continues > to function in some reduced capacity. Everything would still go into > the composes as before and for people who like things the way they > are, there isn't much downside. Meanwhile, for people who want to > trim their package set to the utmost, they would be able to do so > without creating fake stub packages or using hacks to get around requires. I'm OK with this *so long as* people don't start using Recommends: for optional and heavy things. As long as we have a strong convention that Recommends: is for things you're almost certainly going to want but aren't technically *required*, and Suggests: is for things that are pretty optional, it should work OK. What would concern me is if we had a mix of packages using Recommends: for nearly-required things and packages using Recommends: for very-optional things, because you'd then be more or less stuck with the very-optional stuff (since if you skipped 'Recommends' universally, you'd miss lots of important stuff from other packages). -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
