[arch-dev-public] systemd - move to base group and expect it to be installed?
grazzolini at archlinux.org
Tue Sep 12 19:27:55 UTC 2017
Em setembro 12, 2017 14:58 Andreas Radke escreveu:
> New filesystem/systemd packages in testing have changed the way we
> create system users/groups. That's done now via systemd itself or using
> a systemd hook. So every package that needs certain user/group existent
> or certain UID/GID to install its file will depend on systemd to be
> installed on the system.
> Check https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/55492 - systemd is now part of
> I think it's not consequent not to move it to base group. It's the only
> init system we support and therefor should be expected to be installed
> on every Arch installation from now on. User/group creating packages
> will need it installed in any way.
We have discussed this on IRC and this has been a recurring theme over the
years. I see two main things that derive from this:
1) base is assumed or not? I know some developers don't assume base and list
it on their packages dependencies.
We have been telling our users that base is assumed since at least 2009 
2) The second thing that arises from the first is a broader question which is
what do we consider a minimal arch installation?
If the answer to this question is base, then we certainly *must* have systemd
on it. And we can discuss trimming it down, because I think that base has some
packages that shouldn't be there such as, netctl and dhcpcd (I use both).
If the answer is not base, then we should have something like a base-system
group which contains the bare minimum, like linux, glibc, pacman, systemd and
But we must decide on this and make it a policy/standard so things like  do
not happen anymore. That's just one example, there are many others.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 870 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the arch-dev-public