Rick Moen <rick@???> wrote:

>> So it does look as if libsystemd0 does do something.
>
> That doesn't logically follow. My guesstimate is that some GNOME
> plumbing is checking for some library function before it offers
> the user 'removable drives [...] on the desktop'. For libsystemd0
> library functions to _do_ anything reportedly requires systemd be
> present to be reached below the library, i.e., the lib is just interface
> glue.

That is another possibility.
However, for that to be the case then they must be doing the "check if X exists before calling X" technique that I believe must be possible (simply because so many pieces of software have soft dependencies on optional modules).

So if they are doing that with something in systemd itself, there is no reason not to do it with libsystemd0.

But either way, even if libsystemd itself doesn't do (present tense) anything, I have zero trust that it will remain that way. Supposing ${desktop_environment} could really use a function for something (perhaps tied into Udev) - what's to stop the systemd guys "being helpful" and shifting some code into libsystemd ? Not a lot really - udev on one side, desktop environemnt on the other, and some "helpful" routines in between.

Breaks all the "standard practice" of only having glue in the library, rides roughshod over admin preferences, so we trust the systemd guys to never do it - right ?



Edward Bartolo <edbarx@???> wrote:

> Libsystemd0 can be shrunk in cases only a few exported functions are
> needed. That is exactly what I did when systemd became mandatory in
> Debian around two years ago. I used tools like ld, nm and grep to
> find which functions where used from libsystemd0. (See my howto on
> forums.debian.net). Knowing the names of the functions I copied them
> into a source file, obviously, wrote the exports statement and
> compiled the resulting source file. Then, I used a symbolic link
> pointing to tiny libsystemd0.
>
> Now, someone may point fingers to denigrate what I wrote because it
> may not look professional to their tastes.

Not at all. It's one way round the "problem", and neatly gets round the potential for libsystemd being silently expanded into more than just glue.

However, it's another form of sticky tape to hold things together rather than fixing the problem at source.