But systemctl does depend on libsystemd-shared, so a copy of that will
still be in every component. And libsystemd-shared itself pulls in a
lot of stuff, and those libraries no doubt depend on further
libraries:
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffe9e9d0000)
libacl.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libacl.so.1 (0x00007fbc40540000)
libblkid.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libblkid.so.1 (0x00007fbc404e9000)
libcap.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcap.so.2 (0x00007fbc404dd000)
libcrypt.so.2 => not found
libmount.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libmount.so.1 (0x00007fbc4047a000)
libpam.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpam.so.0 (0x00007fbc40466000)
libseccomp.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libseccomp.so.2
(0x00007fbc40446000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 (0x00007fbc3ff21000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007fbc3fd40000)
/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fbc40557000)
libselinux.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libselinux.so.1
(0x00007fbc40418000)
libaudit.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libaudit.so.1 (0x00007fbc403e5000)
libpcre2-8.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpcre2-8.so.0
(0x00007fbc3fca6000)
libcap-ng.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcap-ng.so.0 (0x00007fbc403dd000)
Put it another way, what is the difference in a 'component' before and
after this change, in size and amount of files?
I'm just struggling to justify this; it looks like a very niche need,
driven by a custom, proprietary mechanism to install additional
software into products. The change won't be useful to anyone else,
while complicating systemd packaging further.
Alex
On Wed, 12 Feb 2025 at 08:56, Oleksiy Obitotskyy -X (oobitots -
GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) <oobit...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> Component deliver something and it's content consist of:
>
> binaries/libraries/scripts, etc. that delivered by this component (service)
> itself
> binaries/libraries, etc. on which component depends on
>
> Technically content is per component subdirectory. Every component has its
> own isolated content.
>
> If we have N components each require only systemd-systemctl it mean every
> component will store (on disk) whole systemd/libsystemd package files instead
> of systemctl binary.
>
> Regards,
> Oleksiy
>
> ________________________________
> From: Alexander Kanavin <alex.kana...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2025 19:31
> To: Oleksiy Obitotskyy -X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco)
> <oobit...@cisco.com>
> Cc: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerst...@axis.com>; Ross Burton
> <ross.bur...@arm.com>; openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>; Ruslan Bilovol (rbilovol)
> <rbilo...@cisco.com>
> Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] systemd: move systemctl utility to separate
> subpackage
>
> This still doesn’t make sense. Any target file is contained in one and only
> one package. Where is the duplication?
>
> Alex
>
> On Tue 11. Feb 2025 at 19.04, Oleksiy Obitotskyy -X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC
> INC at Cisco) <oobit...@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> I'm sorry, I confused you mentioned term sysroot. It's not about yocto - we
> just use the same term because it's very similar
> to how it works into yocto.
> We got packages as a result of yocto build and use these artefacts
> (packages) on next stage to populate
> software components content. For some reason we can't use the same approach
> with hardlink to deduplicate
> components content.
>
> Regards,
> Oleksiy
>
> ________________________________
> From: Peter Kjellerstedt <peter.kjellerst...@axis.com>
> Sent: Monday, February 10, 2025 22:05
> To: alex.kana...@gmail.com <alex.kana...@gmail.com>; Oleksiy Obitotskyy -X
> (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco) <oobit...@cisco.com>
> Cc: Ross Burton <ross.bur...@arm.com>;
> openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>; Ruslan Bilovol (rbilovol)
> <rbilo...@cisco.com>
> Subject: RE: [OE-core] [PATCH] systemd: move systemctl utility to separate
> subpackage
>
> Additionally, changing the packaging does not affect what is added to
> the sysroot.
>
> //Peter
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org <openembedded-
> > c...@lists.openembedded.org> On Behalf Of Alexander Kanavin via
> > lists.openembedded.org
> > Sent: den 10 februari 2025 18:20
> > To: oobit...@cisco.com
> > Cc: Ross Burton <ross.bur...@arm.com>; openembedded-
> > c...@lists.openembedded.org; Ruslan Bilovol (rbilovol)
> > <rbilo...@cisco.com>
> > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] systemd: move systemctl utility to separate
> > subpackage
> >
> > They're not actually copied. They're hard-linked from
> > sysroots-components/. This is a cheap operation and it doesn't waste
> > disk space.
> >
> > Alex
> >
> > On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 at 18:05, Oleksiy Obitotskyy via
> > lists.openembedded.org <oobitots=cisco....@lists.openembedded.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Alexander,
> > >
> > > By 'deploying whole systemd' I mean next:
> > >
> > > Every component copy and installs packages with libraries, utilities and
> > config files in component local sysroot, i.e. directory used to create
> > final component image:
> > >
> > > libsystemd0_255.4
> > > libsystemd-shared_255.4
> > > systemd_255.4
> > >
> > > So, on disk we have duplication of files for every component that depend
> > on the systemctl.
> > > In case of separate subpackage we have one root component depend on the
> > systemd and all other components will contain only systemd-systemctl
> > package content.
> > >
> > > Of course, I understand it's quite a specific scenario.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Oleksiy
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Alexander Kanavin <alex.kana...@gmail.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, February 10, 2025 13:03
> > > To: Oleksiy Obitotskyy -X (oobitots - GLOBALLOGIC INC at Cisco)
> > <oobit...@cisco.com>
> > > Cc: Ross Burton <ross.bur...@arm.com>; openembedded-
> > c...@lists.openembedded.org <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>;
> > Ruslan Bilovol (rbilovol) <rbilo...@cisco.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [PATCH] systemd: move systemctl utility to
> > separate subpackage
> > >
> > > On Mon, 10 Feb 2025 at 13:01, Oleksiy Obitotskyy via
> > > lists.openembedded.org <oobitots=cisco....@lists.openembedded.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > We have next situation:
> > > > - a lot of software components that depend on packages and deploy all
> > packages they depend on locally inside component.
> > > > - some components directly depend on systemctl only (e.g. this binary
> > used in scripts), so for every component we have to deploy whole systemd
> > locally.
> > > > - finally, all/some of those components will be merged in some way and
> > will use systemd/libsystemd, but until then it will be nice to get rid of
> > such duplication.
> > >
> > > I'm sorry, but this does not quite make sense. You need to more
> > > specifically describe what 'deploying whole systemd' means, and why is
> > > that problematic.
> > >
> > > Alex
> > >
> > >
> > >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#211220):
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/211220
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/111032725/21656
Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
