On 11.11.2015 12:58, Martin Pitt wrote: > Hello all, > > in case it's useful, this is how we split them in Debian. > > However, is this even a topic for upstream, apart from giving > recommendations? I. e. do you actually consider putting this kind of > split into the upstream build system à la "make install-<component>"? > > Lukáš Nykrýn [2015-11-11 11:47 +0100]: >> Personally I don't think it makes sense to split the package to get a >> smaller core package. Most of our binaries are just few KBs. > > They are actually fairly big, 100 kB to 1.5 MB for systemd itself. I > think the main reason for that is that they all statically link > libsystemd instead of dynamically linking to libsystemd.so.0. Is there > a particular reason for that? > >> Other aspect would be minimizing external dependencies. > > That is one important reason why we split them in Debian; e. g. the > machined/nspawn/importd group pulls in a number of rather heavy > dependencies. udev (including hwdb) is something which you don't need > in containers, so we split that out too. > > Another reason is to make it easy to enable/disable a particular > feature (e. g. libnss-myhostname). > > And then of course the infamous "need to run with sysvinit/upstart", > which other distros don't need to be concerned about :-) > >> So I suggest following scheme > > FTR, this isn't too far away what we already do in Debian/Ubuntu: > >> systemd > > check > >> systemd-libs >> systemd-devel > > They are called a bit differently for distro policy, upgrade safety, > consistency, and multi-arch support reasons; we need separate binary > packages for every lib*.so. But in spirit, "check". > >> systemd-journal-remote (so gatewayd,remote,upload) > > Check, we have exactly this package name. >
"systemd-check" +1 >> systemd-networkd (maybe also with resolved?) > > We currently keep that in the "systemd" package as splitting it out > now is a bit of an upgrade pain, but we discussed doing this. > >> systemd-machine (machined,nspawn,importd) > > We call that package "systemd-container", but it has exactly those, so > "check". > >> systemd-firstboot (firstboot,sysusers?,factory stuff?) > > We don't have a separate package for that. > >> systemd-hwdb > > We split out the entire udev, including hwdb. This nicely reduces the > footprint in containers and also allows us to use udev with > sysvinit/upstart. > > Martin > _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
