John Hughes <john@???> wrote:



>But why? What badness does libsystemd0 do?

A simple principle: let the end user decide what he is going to run.
Why maintainers push libsystemd0 dependency when they can forget it.
Compare: Xfce devs (package maintainers) never required systemd to
run, Mate maintainers require it for mate-session-manager and
a screensaver. There is no use for it. When you can live without
it, why pushing?


I clearly understand your point that libsystemd0 is maybe pretty much useless.
Let me go for a fallacy: when dbus or selinux or pulseaudio appeared,
noone would care if they do be having libpulse, libselinux or dbus
on their machine, noone have made a "Debian without pulse" and so on.

>If I wanted to I could run Debian without systemd. Some things wouldn't

>work, but as I understand it those things don't work on Devuan either.

>What more choice does Devuan give me?


Devuan works the same way that Debian does. Well, old Debian, like Squeeze.
These ~70 packages that depend on *this* are pretty easy to rebuild
even GNOME3, I still don't why Devuan is only in its alpha, this work could be
done a year ago.Having a working Unstable installation I would say it should

be in beta at least. The only thing that remains is vdev.
Even though someone wrote on Wikipedia that Devuan provides systemd but as
an optional (init?), it's far from true. It is more freedom of systemd
as I said, considering devuan-baseconf package.

Mitt