On 10/10/18 at 15:23, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> 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.

  Actually, that's a fact.


> 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


  What could they possibly do of any harm to your system systemd unit
files, that is plain ASCII config files?


>> 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.

 [alessandro@wksrn05 ~]$ du -sh /etc/systemd /lib/systemd/system/
44K     /etc/systemd
464K    /lib/systemd/system/
 [alessandro@wksrn05 ~]$


  That's the *huuge* ammount os "system resources" they occuply on Ascii
(Devuan 2.0).

How does this compare with forking and maintaining hundreds of packages
just to have them not install those files?


>> 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.


  Everyone busy maintainig and developing Devuan already knows how
that's to be done.  They already did it for a lot of packages to take
away more than just systemd unit files.  Of course you're always welcome
to step in to do the gritty work and take maintainership of a few,
important packages to take away those "dangerous" unit files.


>> 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.


  And I wish we were living in a world where the only struggle was
advancing science, knowledge, free software and landing on far away
planets and explore the galaxy.  Reality is quite a different story,
though, and it's not the Free Software people's fault.


>> 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.


  How much did you read of the code of the packages you have installed
in your system?

How can you be sure the only piece of software that's not to be trusted
is systemd0, where does this obsession come from?


> 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.


  Yeah, that's the spirit: patch up and contribute, maybe we'll end up
having a totaly Debian- and systemd-independed distribution and lots of
people would be grateful.

  But if you don't, at least please stop the whining.



--
Alessandro Selli <alessandroselli@???>
VOIP SIP: dhatarattha@???
Chiave firma e cifratura PGP/GPG signing and encoding key:
BA651E4050DDFC31E17384BABCE7BD1A1B0DF2AE