Re: systemd as external dependency
- From: Colin Walters <walters verbum org>
- To: Brian Cameron <brian cameron oracle com>
- Cc: William Jon McCann <william jon mccann gmail com>, desktop-devel-list gnome org, Josselin Mouette <joss debian org>
- Subject: Re: systemd as external dependency
- Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 13:28:09 -0400
On Wed, May 18, 2011 at 1:16 PM, Brian Cameron <brian cameron oracle com> wrote:
> In my discussions with people at Oracle, there is some concern about
> how interfaces like systemd are being managed. Interface management is
> something that Sun (and now Oracle) obsesses about, as many of you who
> have heard about our "ARC" process know. Many people at Oracle ask me
> questions about what is going on, but I myself have trouble following
> the evolution from HAL to systemd or how exactly this impacts GNOME on
> non-Linux systems. I am still digesting the fact that ConsoleKit is
> going away. Is there a clear big picture, timeline, or roadmap yet?
I think it's pretty simple; from the perspective of GNOME application
authors, these external dependencies are unstable, and may go away or
change. In fact, application authors should really know that anything
outside GTK+ and its dependencies may go away in change.
(In reality, the only stable points in the Linux FOSS ecosystem are
the system call interface, glibc, the X server, and GTK+).
> At the very least, I hope we can design a desktop so that if systemd is
> not present this just disables those parts of the desktop that require
> it. Not having systemd may disable support for things like removeable
> media, power management, etc. There should not be a reason why not
> having systemd should prevent GNOME from being used at all.
Yes, that's the same as what I said - this is GNOME in the "plain old
Unix X head" case.
] [Thread Prev