]] Bjørn Mork > Tollef Fog Heen <tfh...@err.no> writes: > > ]] Norbert Preining > > > >> > systemd needs cgroups, that's pretty well established. Arguably, it > >> > should die with a clearer message. > >> > >> No, NO NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO > >> > >> *IT*SHOULD*NOT*DIE*!!! It is in PID 1. Please digest that. > > > > Am I understanding you correctly that you don't think there are any > > situations where compiling out features from the kernel can lead to pid1 > > not working would be acceptable? > > The main problem is how you resolve the "not working". Dying will never > a sane way to give up from pid 1. Try exec'ing something else instead, > like a shell or a stripped down init not needing all those optional > kernel fatures.
You're right that «how to resolve» is one part of the question. It's not clear that execing a shell will fare you any better. Virtual consoles and serial ports are optional kernel features too, after all. > And wrt the question about required kernel feaures: Why should the > systemd pid1 require more features than other init systems? I have been > told before when complaining about putting additional complexity into > pid1 that this isn't true - that systemd really doesn't add dependencies > to pid1 compared to alternative init systems. This doesn't seem to be > completely true. I'm not particularly interested in reiterating the entire discussion here, I'm sure you'll find answers to why systemd requires the features it does in #727708, git commit logs and mailing list archives. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87r45eh7l5....@xoog.err.no
