Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-04 Thread Holger Winkelmann
On Dec 5, 2011, at 1:08 AM, Kay Sievers wrote: >> >> Kay, Thanks for the clarifications about private sockets and such. Makes all >> more sense to me now. your are right, seems not much needs to configured out. > > Sounds good. In case it wasn't clear, we are always interested in > clean patches

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-04 Thread Kay Sievers
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 20:45, Holger Winkelmann wrote: > On Dec 4, 2011, at 6:15 PM, Kay Sievers wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 17:52, Holger Winkelmann [TP] >> wrote: >>> On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote: For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely >>

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-04 Thread Holger Winkelmann
On Dec 4, 2011, at 6:15 PM, Kay Sievers wrote: > On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 17:52, Holger Winkelmann [TP] > wrote: >> On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote: >>> >>> For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely >>> necessary, and can probably be made optional with a few ch

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-04 Thread Kay Sievers
On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 17:52, Holger Winkelmann [TP] wrote: > On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote: >> >> For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely >> necessary, and can probably be made optional with a few changes, but >> the D-Bus protocol is used by systemctl to t

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-04 Thread Holger Winkelmann [TP]
On Dec 4, 2011, at 4:40 PM, Kay Sievers wrote: > > For very simple setups, the D-Bus bus daemon is not absolutely > necessary, and can probably be made optional with a few changes, but > the D-Bus protocol is used by systemctl to talk to systemd, and can > not really be optimized out. systemctl

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-04 Thread Holger Winkelmann [TP]
Hi Eduardo, > Hi Holger, > > I think we have to blame the uninformed complaints that Systemd is > only for the desktop because of Dbus. I was aware of this, but being a freedesktop project this not always feels server alike. > > Dbus can be built without X support. On Gimokod Linux the compress

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-04 Thread Kay Sievers
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 23:31, Holger Winkelmann wrote: > We are about to renovate our embedded toolchain a bit and consider to > integrate > systemd as init. We are a bit concerned about the DBUS dependency in systemd > as > we have to meet a 4-8 MB hard disk (flash) requirement, > > I read abou

Re: [systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-03 Thread Eduardo Tongson
On Sat, Dec 3, 2011 at 10:31 PM, Holger Winkelmann wrote: > Hi all, > > We are about to renovate our embedded toolchain a bit and consider to > integrate > systemd as init. We are a bit concerned about the DBUS dependency in systemd > as > we have to meet a 4-8 MB hard disk (flash) requirement,

[systemd-devel] systemd footprint

2011-12-03 Thread Holger Winkelmann
Hi all, We are about to renovate our embedded toolchain a bit and consider to integrate systemd as init. We are a bit concerned about the DBUS dependency in systemd as we have to meet a 4-8 MB hard disk (flash) requirement, I read about some other folks have used systems for embedded devices, but