On 2015-04-15 19:01, Hendrik Boom wrote: > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 06:39:29PM +0200, Franco Lanza wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 01:22:28PM +0200, Paul van der Vlis wrote: > > > > > > systemd-shim is for when you *don't* want systemd. > > > > Yes, but cause of you have things that depend on components of systemd. > > We don't want systemd nor anything depending on components from systemd,
> > so, we don't want the shim too. > > > > systemd-shim is for who don't want to have systemd in pid 1 but accept > > other systemd components. We don't want systemd at all. > > Is this really true? Or is systemd to handle components that have > nothing to do with systemd except that they were, unfortunately, > developed on a system where they had to use systemd to access system > services that were formerly, and are elsewhere, handled by other, more > traditional means? > > -- hendrik Heyo. Wanted to see how things are going. The main purpose of a systemd-shim is to allow code that depends on systemd to be compiled and execute cleanly, without having to actually introduce a binary dependency on systemd. Whether or not that is actually a laudable goal is the subject of much debate. >From a user standpoint, it lets them use software that they might not otherwise have on Devuan.
_______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
