Luca Boccassi wrote: > > how about if we instead > > look into another idea that I think was briefly mentioned earlier: > > namely, packagers run a shell command "optional-libsystemd who pinky > > users", where optional-libsystemd is something like the attached script. > > No. We are not going to add random per-package scripts and hacks. > There are in the order of ~60000 (sixty thousands) packages in Debian, > how on earth can something like that possibly scale?
Isn't that what the .spec files (or the 'control' files in Debian) are about? Each package has a packager, who maintains that file. Many packages need special features (some produce several binary packages [1], some need special compilers or workarounds for specific architectures, and so on). The packager handles it. That's how it scales. But wait: Why do you worry about scaling to 60000 packages? You said that all you want is to improve the build of "minimal environments", and e.g. Simon and I agreed that syslogd does not need to be considered for this purpose. What else is on your mind here? Why would your dlopen effort go beyond "minimal environments"? Bruno [1] https://packages.debian.org/trixie/source/inetutils
