[arch-general] systemd new dependencies impede using OpenRC

[João Miguel]

First of all, thank you for such a quick reply.

Now, I don't want to preach. But I will not pretend I chose Arch Linux at
random. I chose it for many reasons, an important one of them being that
I liked the Arch Way, it made sense to me, and it seemed you were
following it. Now it seems to belong to a forgotten past.

On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 10:34:01AM -0400, Daniel Micay wrote:
> Arch is as much a systemd-based distribution as it is a Pacman-based
> distribution at this point. (...)
Is it now? https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way says
different. systemd is the opposite of the Arch Way except for being
open-source: it is not simple, not minimalist, and not user-centric.

But that is not really what this problem is about. Although it is a bit
mind-boggling that systemd has been chosen as the main init system for
Arch, its shortcomings are not necessarily shortcomings of Arch. That
is, Arch can still be simple, minimalist, etc. and it is with the
conscience of this fact that I chose to install Arch Linux in all my
systems. systemd breaks the Arch Way. Having it as a package doesn't.

However, making so many packages depend on it so that any basic desktop
usage (in the case of the util-linux dependency, even non-graphical usage)
does break one principle listed in the aforementioned page: freedom. In
fact, I ought to quote it:

    Another guiding principle of Arch Linux development is freedom. Users
    are not only permitted to make all decisions concerning system
    configuration, but also choose what their system will be.

    By keeping the system simple, Arch Linux provides the freedom to make
    any choice about the system.

    A freshly installed Arch Linux system contains only basic core
    components with no automatic configuration performed. Users are able to
    configure the system as they wish, from the shell. From the start of the
    installation procedure, every component of the system is 100%
    transparent and accessible for instant access, removal, or replacement
    by alternative components.

    The large number of packages and build scripts in the various Arch Linux
    repositories also support freedom of choice, offering free and open
    source software for those who prefer it, as well as proprietary software
    packages, for those who embrace functionality over ideology. It is the
    user who chooses.

    As Judd Vinet, the founder of the Arch Linux project said: "[Arch Linux]
    is what you make it."

I used systemd in Arch for a long time. In fact, when I came, it was
already the main init system, and I didn't really mind, or know much
about it.

Nonetheless, respecting the quoted principle, I could easily replace
systemd by OpenRC when I chose to. Note that just last month, over 3
years had passed after systemd was adopted, and I could still use
OpenRC. Now, for whatever reason, the principle was broken without
notice. I'd expect news or an email in this mailing list, to which I've
been paying close attention (though I knew less than the authors about
most problems...).

> Upstreams are integrating support for systemd features and Arch is going
> to be enabling them, whether it's sd_notify support or something else.
Upstream? Then why is it that for the same versions of the same
packages, say, in Gentoo they are not dependencies? Example, compare
these two:

https://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/x11-drivers/xf86-input-evdev/xf86-input-evdev-2.9.2.ebuild
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/xf86-input-evdev/

That doesn't mean I want to compile everything. Or that you should have
packages for, say, OpenRC. The packages in the repos are not my choice,
I'm not asking to choose which ones should be on the official repos,
that's what the unofficial repos and the AUR are for. It just means you
shouldn't suppose people have these or those packages installed, but
that instead, and as you did before, even years after systemd being
default, you should provide whatever you want, open the doors you want,
not closing any others. Minimalism means minimal dependencies too.

If I wanted systemd bloat and a dash of hypocrisy, I'd stay in Windows
installing Internet Explorer... I worry the suggestions to change distro
are going too far. The point is not one of telling what the devs should
or shouldn't do, but of remembering the principles upon which the
community is based.

I rest my case. Again, any reply is welcome.
João Miguel