[aur-general] Is base an implicit dependency?

[Caleb Maclennan]

On 2021-07-27 23:10, Jason Ryan via aur-general wrote:
> My bad: I had no idea that I needed to replace the chroot directory.
> 
> Birth: 2013-04-15 15:52:13.023713756 +1200

Hats off to you for using chroots to build even before the practice was 
so strongly encouraged as it is now.

Perhaps updates to the dev tools should occasionally require resetting 
these chroots? You may not be the only one affected even after years...

> If you are running Arch, you have base installed: that has
> always been an explicit expectation.

This was true, and I‌ think it still is true but only for when the 
installation is the host system on bare metal. Running Arch in 
containers is a bit different. The current devtools chroots are a good 
example why: for some virtual/container environments you don't want or 
need the child system to do everything that a bare metal system would 
do.

I have to give props to the Microsoft engineer that once said:

"Besides: you guys have systemd, which if I'm going to treat it the same 
way I treated NTFS, is an all-devouring octopus monster about crawl out 
of the sea and eat Tokyo and spit it out as a giant binary logfile."

But even if you don't like systemd, if you use it as a virtual container 
host, you don't run itself inside itself, you just let it take over and 
pass things through to itself.

Hence it's possible to have a very much orthodox Arch system (running 
systemd even) without the systemd package installed.

Caleb