On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 05:15:39PM -0400, Dave Reisner wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I apologize for this being somewhat after-the-fact. It was discussed on
> IRC, but that of course doesn't necessarily cater to a wide enough
> audience. Some of you have probably already noticed that systemd 189 now
> provides, conflicts, and replaces libsystemd and systemd-tools. This is
> the next logical step since systemd will eventually be in base once we
> have sufficient unit coverage.
>
> As an added bonus, maybe this will encourage people who haven't switched
> over yet to do so.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
Just to be clear, there aren't any new conflicts introduced with this
change. sysvinit/initscripts and systemd can still co-exist, with
systemd-sysvcompat continuing to carry the only conflict. The net result
is only that you will have systemd installed whether you use it or not.
d
08-27-2012, 06:19 AM
Daniel Wallace
merging systemd back to a singular package
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 07:59:52AM +0200, Heiko Baums wrote:
> Am Sun, 26 Aug 2012 17:15:39 -0400
> schrieb Dave Reisner <d@falconindy.com>:
>
> > I apologize for this being somewhat after-the-fact. It was discussed
> > on IRC, but that of course doesn't necessarily cater to a wide enough
> > audience. Some of you have probably already noticed that systemd 189
> > now provides, conflicts, and replaces libsystemd and systemd-tools.
> > This is the next logical step since systemd will eventually be in
> > base once we have sufficient unit coverage.
> >
> > As an added bonus, maybe this will encourage people who haven't
> > switched over yet to do so.
>
> "Nobody is forcing systemd on anybody."
>
> Wasn't it this what was always said by the devs in all those long
> threads about systemd? And what are you doing now? Isn't this not
> forcing it on everybody?
>
> "Nobody has the intention to build a wall."
>
> Heiko
I am pretty sure it said they will still work together, you still
aren't forced to use it, you don't need udev etc...
--
Daniel Wallace
Archlinux Trusted User (gtmanfred)
Georgia Institute of Technology
08-27-2012, 07:37 AM
Tom Gundersen
merging systemd back to a singular package
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Geert Hendrickx <geert@hendrickx.be> wrote:
> A systemd upgrade question (not related to this particular update),
> do you generally need to reboot when systemd is upgraded?
In general, it is probably a good idea to reboot after upgrading
low-level packages. In the case of systemd, it should be sufficient to
do "systemctl daemon-reexec".
-t
08-27-2012, 07:48 AM
Tom Gundersen
merging systemd back to a singular package
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
> "Nobody is forcing systemd on anybody."
>
> Wasn't it this what was always said by the devs in all those long
> threads about systemd? And what are you doing now? Isn't this not
> forcing it on everybody?
No one were forcing systemd on anybody. This packaging change still
does not force systemd on anybody. It does "force" you to have the
binaries installed, but it does not force you to actually boot with
it.
Since the above quoted statement was made, a decision was taken to
move to systemd by default, so it clearly no longer applies. While you
are still free to use initscripts, at some point other packages are
likely to depend on you booting with systemd (NetworkManager, polkit,
Gnome, etc.).
HTH,
Tom
08-27-2012, 08:32 AM
Joakim Hernberg
merging systemd back to a singular package
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 09:48:48 +0200
Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
> Since the above quoted statement was made, a decision was taken to
> move to systemd by default, so it clearly no longer applies. While you
> are still free to use initscripts, at some point other packages are
> likely to depend on you booting with systemd (NetworkManager, polkit,
> Gnome, etc.).
Please support our traditional initscripts as long as possible, as I for
one really don't look forwards to systemd, at least not at this point
in time. Reasons excluded to avoid yet another flamefest...
08-27-2012, 08:40 AM
Tom Gundersen
merging systemd back to a singular package
On Aug 27, 2012 10:32 AM, "Joakim Hernberg" <jbh@alchemy.lu> wrote:
> Please support our traditional initscripts as long as possible,
I will. I just don't know how long that will be, so people should prepare
to move.
Tom
08-27-2012, 08:48 AM
Thomas Bächler
merging systemd back to a singular package
Am 27.08.2012 10:32, schrieb Joakim Hernberg:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 09:48:48 +0200
> Tom Gundersen <teg@jklm.no> wrote:
>
>> Since the above quoted statement was made, a decision was taken to
>> move to systemd by default, so it clearly no longer applies. While you
>> are still free to use initscripts, at some point other packages are
>> likely to depend on you booting with systemd (NetworkManager, polkit,
>> Gnome, etc.).
>
> Please support our traditional initscripts as long as possible, as I for
> one really don't look forwards to systemd, at least not at this point
> in time. Reasons excluded to avoid yet another flamefest...
If you search the archives, you will notice that longer initscripts
support is already planned.
But this only concerns the booting itself. As consolekit is
unmaintained, polkit will soon depend on systemd. The next Gnome version
will require systemd - more to come.
That said, if you run a machine that does not depend on any of this
(like a server), you will probably be able to keep using traditional
initscripts for a while.
Of course, this may change as the situation changes.
08-27-2012, 09:30 AM
Joakim Hernberg
merging systemd back to a singular package
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 10:48:32 +0200
Thomas Bächler <thomas@archlinux.org> wrote:
> But this only concerns the booting itself. As consolekit is
> unmaintained, polkit will soon depend on systemd. The next Gnome
> version will require systemd - more to come.
I don't run gnome, but kde is just as bad in this case
> That said, if you run a machine that does not depend on any of this
> (like a server), you will probably be able to keep using traditional
> initscripts for a while.
I am primarily thinking of a few servers I've setup with archlinux. I
really don't look forwards to run all the overhead that systemd will
bring with it on those machines..
Will try to refrain from further comments now, since I don't want to
pollute this list with flames...
Thanks in advance for the time I still have left with arch
08-27-2012, 12:26 PM
Jakob Herrmann
merging systemd back to a singular package
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
egin{quote}
But this only concerns the booting itself. As consolekit is
unmaintained, polkit will soon depend on systemd. The next Gnome version
will require systemd - more to come....
end{quote}
Isn't it possible to start systemd daemon-like if one of those
components is used...and stop it again after e.g. stopping Gnome? This
won't avoid unnecessary overhead, but at least the boot process etc.
could be kept unchanged.
Cheers,
Jakob
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
merging systemd back to a singular package
