[systemd-devel] [packaging] split of systemd package

Lennart Poettering lennart at poettering.net
Thu Nov 12 02:15:33 PST 2015

On Thu, 12.11.15 10:46, Martin Pitt (martin.pitt at ubuntu.com) wrote:

> Lennart Poettering [2015-11-12  9:59 +0100]:
> > THere's no point in shipping the non-binary version of the hwdb. The
> > hwdb isn't a cache, it's a compiled version of the hwdb, and you don't
> > the sources around for this.
> Won't you need it for udevadm hwdb --update, after you add a new
> hwdb.d/ file? Or can we now have multiple compiled dbs, one shipped by
> the package and one built dynamically by hwdb --update?

Well, if you do add those locally. But that's not a typical usecase really.


Lennart Poettering, Red Hat

More information about the systemd-devel mailing list