On 25.07.2018 10:20, Joel Roth wrote:

Hi,

> Most of those "alarming" files are just systemd units files, put there> by daemons/packages/utilities who "also" support systemd in a way or>
another. So they are not alarming but just *totally* *harmless* if you>
don't have a running systemd as PID 1, since only systemd understands>
and can run them.

At least that's the theory. I'm waiting for some yerk upstreams coming
around and doing some other silly things with them. Yes: in Lennartware
world, I've learned to expect those things :o

> It would be *totally* *useless* (and utterly> *stupid* IMHO) to fork, rebuild, and maintain a few more hundred>
packages only because they happen to provide a systemd unit file for>
those systems where systemd is used.
I don't think so. I agree that this eats resources with minimal gain.

BTW: we don't need to do that for all at once. Start with picking a few
important packages and then learn how to handle that really efficiently.

My wish is having a (technical and organisational) infrastructure which
allows us to quickly/easily fork and maintain any package. (on distro
side as well as individual operator). Certainly, we'd have to learn a
lot for that, but IMHO a good thing.

> libsystemd0 is used by some daemons to verify if systemd is running or
> not. If it's not, libsystemd is *totally* *harmless*.

I haven't read the code for quite some time, so I'm not trusting it.
Too much happened in that area. I just don't want that code anywhere
near to any of my systems, I couldn't sleep well. I would have to
carefully review the code w/ my own eyes, but then I could also
patch out the systemd dependencies.


--mtx