On Fri, 31 Jan 2020 02:36:29 -0500 Sam Hartman <hartm...@debian.org> wrote: > >>>>> "Michael" == Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> writes: > > Michael> Tbh, I'm not sure what kind of answer you expect from me. > > Michael> I guess I already provided my feedback here and mentioned > Michael> what kind of solution I prefer. I can repeat this in this > Michael> bug report, but I'm not sure if this is helpful. > > Are you referring to the idea of using libsystemd0 and having elogind > use the same dbus interface so be able to reuse libsystemd0? > > If so, Mark explained why that didn't work in #940034. > I think when you originally raised the concern Mark may not have > entirely understood what you were thinking about. But at least if I > characterized things correctly above, Mark did fully explore that option > in #940034. > > A brief summary is that libelogind0 does basically use the same dbus > interface as libsystemd0. However, libsystemd0's interface requirements > extends beyond dbus; there are a number of functions that for example > are implemented purely in terms of cgroup membership tests. Elogind's > interface diverges among other reasons because elogind has a different > cgroup hierarchy.
If this is unfixable in elogind, I only see two alternatives: a/ elogind is not suitable for a binary distro like Debian and should be removed b/ you need a different way to switch over. Reboot into an environment for which you have control over, then uninstall systemd/systemd-sysv without triggering the removal of most packages. I acknowledge that this is inconvenient, but such a switch-over should not happen often. Michael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature