On 08/09/14 00:21, lee wrote:
I don't have gnome-settings-daemon installed on Fedora, which uses
systemd.
Indeed; on Fedora, systemd is IIRC the *only* init system.
On the Debian VM, it says that dbus depends on libsystemd-login0, so how
could I remove that without having to remove xfce?
You can't.
And thus, you see the central tradeoff of binary vs. source
distributions. In a binary distribution, the pain entailed in coping
with combinatorial explosion means that even if a program *does* have a
build system which allows extensive changes to which features get built
into it, the distribution will probably only provide one configuration
(typically, the most featureful, since "why does this depend on
$LIBRARY_I_HATE?" is a rarer complaint than "why does this exclude 75%
of the featureset?") out of the myriad possible configurations.
In a source distribution, the end user has the freedom to configure
their builds how they please. On the other hand, they need a much more
extensive understanding of their system, and they have to devote more
labour and computational resources to building their system.
Perhaps you should consider this option.
(This is where I mention that Debian's binary packages of the Xorg X
server Depends: udev, and that the udev in Debian is the udev maintained
by the systemd maintainers in the systemd git repository.)
A "desktop system" is merely a "desktop system", and an init system is
merely an init system. It is a bug when a "desktop system" like xfce
depends on a particular init system, or parts thereof, no matter if
directly or indirectly, especially for a distribution that intends to
support a choice of init systems so that users can choose what they want
to use and what not.
Some components of XFCE have a hard dependency on dbus (and this is
conceptually legitimate). dbus has a build-time-optional dependency on
libsystemd-login, and a quick experimental check on my system confirms
that the most recent version of the dbus suite, downloaded in source
form directly from the dbus website, can be built on Linux without a
dependency on libsystemd-login:
$ ./configure --disable-systemd && make all
[gerbil spew from the build process elided]
$ ldd bus/dbus-daemon
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffb59fe000)
libexpat.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexpat.so.1
(0x00007fb354c2c000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0
(0x00007fb354a0f000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007fb354665000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fb354e8a000)
However, standard practice in Debian is "enable ALL the things", so the
dbus package in Debian jessie GNU/Linux systems is not built with
--disable-systemd, and so it Depends: libsystemd-login0.
Again: if you don't want the constraints attendant on accepting someone
else's decisions about how the software on your computer is configured
at build time, the alternative is to accept the burden of installing
things from source instead.
This bug just shows again how systemd is taking everything over, which
is a bad thing. Systemd has become a single piece of software for a
very limited purpose without which more and more totally unrelated
software for totally different purposes isn't going to work anymore.
That's like you're required to have, let's say, MS Windows installed on
your hardware to be able to use it.
Others have said this before. I finally realise what they mean. Why
aren't all distributions standing up against this but instead embrace
it?
Last time I looked, systemd was not the default init system in Gentoo. I
believe that they even facilitate the use of alternative /dev managers
in place of systemd-udevd.
Perhaps you should investigate this approach in more detail; you seem to
have a legitimate and praiseworthy requirement for a higher level of
control over what runs on your system than a binary distribution can
realistically provide.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/540d9d89.8070...@zen.co.uk
