F22 System Wide Change: Systemd Package Split

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 10:37:34AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:27 AM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
> <zbyszek at in.waw.pl> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 04:41:53AM +0000, Peter Robinson wrote:
> >> I agree on the systemd-filesystem side of things, the binaries sounds
> >> like it would be better described as systemd-utils with a provides for
> >> -units.
> 
> > This could be a good idea, but I think that having an additional
> > name would cause more confusion. The name is arbitrary anyway.
> 
> Sure, put all the interesting tools in a -utils rpm. Oh, wait, we
> already have that, it is called systemd.rpm. :)
"all the interesting tools" is vague. "tools needed to run
systemd's spec file macros" is imho much more concrete.

> I really do not want to see this broken package-split being
> implemented. The core systemd is not supposed to be separated into
> different packages. Things have complex inter-dependencies, they
> change all the time and they move around. Splitting them will just
> create a mess, for no apparent reason than optimizing some misguided
> space-saving efforts.
> 
> We really have more important problems to solve than making the
> already far to complex package management even worse, and without any
> obvious benefit.
I'm in the group of people working on fixing systemd bugs in Fedora, so
I'm quite aware of the issues. But people have been asking for this kind
of split, so it should at least be considered.

Even if the space saving are modest, they tend to grow with each
systemd release. Basically every daemon package in Fedora has to
depend on systemd (or systemd-units), so those modest saving are
multiplied by a large number.

Zbyszek