[systemd-devel] setting up to allow separate udev and systemd builds

[Bryan Kadzban]

Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Fri, 15.06.12 20:06, Bryan Kadzban (bryan at kadzban.is-a-geek.net) wrote:
> 
>> dbus
>> libcap
> 
> I am quite happy with depending on these two as it makes little sense to
> build an OS without it, unless you go super minimal in which case
> sysemd/udev are not relevant.

As I said, dbus probably makes sense for a full desktop system.  Most of
us that are pushing for these changes are *not* running that.  Only
Fedora and Ubuntu seem to be pushing it this hard from what I can tell.

Web/mail/whatever servers, where users never log in except possibly over
ssh, have *zero* use for dbus.

FS capability support is also unnecessary unless you're trying to get
some kind of security certification or something; the kernel even allows
disabling support entirely.  (CONFIG_EXT?_FS_XATTR)

>> m4
>> intltool
>> gperf (--enable-keymap will require gperf for a udev build as well)
> 
> These are only build-time deps, and hence are totally OK to have.
> 
> I mean, the next thing you come up with is a patch to not require
> automake and use only make, just because you have a problem with
> dependencies? I mean, seriously.

No, because I realize as well as you do that automake is only required
to run automake, before configuring, before turning the git tree into
the distribution package ("make dist-xz" or whatever).  In the tarballs
as distributed, automake is totally unnecessary unless the distributed
tarball has a bug.

Automake is not a dependency.  m4, intltool, and gperf are, because
configure unconditionally requires them to be present.