On 15/04/15 21:01, 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

Hello Hendrik,

I am not a coder but I think that is entirely true. From Debian jessie
systemd-shim:

[quote]
Description-en: shim for systemd
This package emulates the systemd function that are required to run
the systemd helpers without using the init service
[end quote]

But that is not the main reason I don't want to use anything related or
built due to systemd. Particularly for systemd-shim, the posting on LKML
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/10/7/254 has been discussed all over the
internet. I am not sure if that would be true as systemd-shim is still
in Debian sid, but it confirms that it is very easy to force the lock-in
to systemd for users who don't want to use systemd as init but still
want to use other systemd components.

Cheers,

Anto