On Fri, Jun 16, 2017, 6:02 PM Dragan FOSS <dragan.foss@???> wrote:

> On 17.06.2017. 02:39, Bruce Perens wrote:
> > I don't see any problem with a generic interface to the things that
> > libsystemd does , if one could be arrived at, or if the current API is
> > sufficiently generic.
>
>
> I don't see any purpose that *any* package has a libsystemd dependency
> in distribution with systemd removed?
>

Although the design of systemd is unacceptable, the facilities it provided
to desktop applications are not all uniformly bad ideas. Providing a
generic and well architected way for many init systems and non-init
utilities to provide such services through one common API is not anathema,
even if the API looks like libsystemd0 or the library bears The Accursed
Name.

>