Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Bruce Dubbs wrote: >> I did have a private email with a volunteer to write a hint. If I get >> that, I'll add a note in the systemd section that points there. > > I saw a commit mail to -book that added the hint link. > > However, if someone (like me...) *really really* doesn't want systemd, and > knows it from the get-go, shouldn't they avoid building all the other junk > like libacl / libattr / expat / *dbus* / etc., too? The current list of > packages that are only necessary because systemd was added are in the hint, > but how do we keep those packages in that state?
I agree that dbus is not needed for servers, but I think most X environments are using it now. Are you able to get around that? The word I've been hearing is that dbus will get integrated into the kernel, although I suspect that would be a configuration option. > Because now that all this stuff is present, I can see a whole lot of changes > that don't realize they're adding even more dependence on these libraries, > because the libs are there in all the testing, which follows the book. For > any such change, I would rather default to not making it than force the extra > libraries, although what to actually do depends on what each change is and > which library in particular it needs. > > (dbus can go jump off a cliff with its abort() calls from a library, crashing > the X server and breaking video hardware. expat is annoying but not quite so > much as dbus. libacl/libcap and whatever else are at least small and simple, > but having e.g. acl support in coreutils seems like it has some side effects > that aren't clear yet.) The hint does suggest what packages are not needed. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
