Hi, On 2024-04-03 17:58:55 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> writes: > > On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 7:57 PM Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> wrote: > >> Openssh has now integrated [1] a patch to remove the dependency on > >> libsystemd > >> for triggering service manager readyness notifications, by inlining the > >> necessary function. That's not hard, the protocol is pretty simple. > >> I suspect we should do the same. We're not even close to being a target as > >> attractive as openssh, but still, it seems unnecessary. > > > +1. > > I didn't read the patch, but if it's short and stable enough then this > seems like a good idea.
It's basically just checking for an env var, opening the unix socket indicated by that, writing a string to it and closing the socket again. > (If openssh and we are using such a patch, that will probably be a big > enough stake in the ground to prevent somebody deciding to change the > protocol ...) One version of the openssh patch to remove liblzma was submitted by one of the core systemd devs, so I think they agree that it's a stable API. The current protocol supports adding more information by adding attributes, so it should be extensible enough anyway. > >> An argument could be made to instead just remove support, but I think it's > >> quite valuable to have intra service dependencies that can rely on the > >> server actually having started up. > > > If we remove support we're basically just asking most of our linux > > packagers to add it back in, and they will add it back in the same way we > > did it. I think we do everybody a disservice if we do that. It's useful > > functionality. > > Yeah, that idea seems particularly silly in view of the desire > expressed earlier in this thread to reduce the number of patches > carried by packagers. People packaging for systemd-using distros > will not consider that this functionality is optional. Yep. Greetings, Andres Freund