On Mar 30, Martin Pitt <mp...@debian.org> wrote: > IMHO, systemd should just ship what you need for booting a minimal > system, and shouldn't have big dependencies. We currently cripple some > features (networkd, due to dropping iptables-dev) or not ship them at > all (importd, journald-remote) as they pull in too many dependencies, > which isn't satisfying either. I agree.
> Hence the idea of systemd-extras -- everything which brings in large > dependencies and isn't needed for booting every system can go there. > systemd would Recommends: systemd-extras, but admins of embedded > machines etc. could remove/not install it. A single -extras package is not a good solution unless we believe that all these features are non-relevant corner cases that only a significant minority of users care about. I do not believe that this will be true for the networkd firewall features, for a start. So as long as one of the features will be reasonably popular, which I expect that will happen at least for the networkd firewall features, then most people will just install both packages. I am not opposed to a systemd/systemd-full split *if* we have a clear idea of the use cases of both packages but I see no benefit in just creating a second package for everything that contains everything that has extra dependencies. -- ciao, Marco
pgp6xEpPDqA7y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list Pkg-systemd-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-systemd-maintainers
