Ustable and Testing Systemd.

boughtonp · 2023-10-19 13:03:09

Altoid wrote:

Not on any Devuan team, not a dev/maintainer/packager either.
Nevertheless, I sent the people at Distrowatch an email.

Thanks for taking the time with all that - a disappointing attitude from DistroWatch. :(

That said, I have not seen/found which page of the Repology site says anything about Devuan and systemd so I did not address the matter with them.

I think it was noted in a thread about a German news/blog article - actually, it looks like it occurred in that thread golinux linked.

-

Altoid wrote:

I think this thread can be marked as solved.

I don't, because it isn't (yet).

Despite their poor attitude, I doubt the DistroWatch team would deliberately do something different for testing/unstable, yet there is clearly a difference which causes systemd version numbers to appear in those columns and not for the released versions.

So they are getting 254.5 from somewhere, and checking the search results, there is one package in ceres/excalibur that is not in daedalus or earlier:
https://pkginfo.devuan.org/cgi-bin/pack … ev=254.5-1
https://packages.debian.org/sid/systemd-dev

This package contains the systemd and udev pkg-config files. Note that these are different from the libsystemd's and libudev's pkg-config files, which can still be found in the respective dev packages, but instead provide data such as the installation directories for units, and more.

I suspect if systemd-dev gets added to Amprolla's banned package list, the next DistoWatch update would return to showing hyphens for all columns.

Is it possible for Amprolla to automatically blacklist anything matching ^systemd- and/or with Source: systemd, and require a manual override for the rare situations in which such a package is necessary?

(I'm not entirely convinced there is actually any such situation; seems to me libsystemd0 could be replaced with a dummy/stub from a Devuan-controlled package, but that's probably a separate topic.)

Last edited by boughtonp (2023-10-19 13:10:08)

Altoid · 2023-10-19 21:56:36

Hello:

boughtonp wrote:

Thanks ...

You're welcome.

boughtonp wrote:

... disappointing attitude ...

To say the least.

boughtonp wrote:

I don't, because it isn't ...

I meant solved for the OP who (because of Distrowatch) thought Unstable and Testing used systemd.
That was cleared up and ceased to be an issue for him.

On the other hand, what was not cleared up and you seem to have cracked, is the why Distrowatch has the wrong data or at the very least, misinterprets the available data, something which was beyond my intent.

And therein lies the lack of basic common sense / bad attitude from the chap at Distrowatch.

Devuan (let's accept that it was Devuan, just for argument's sake) is explaining that Unstable and Testing do not have/use systemd, that all those files are shims to be able to use some packages from the Debian repositories.

But no, they dig in deeper, wriggling their way out the argument and insisting.

Wouldn't it have been much more reasonable for them to have sent an email to the address I provided and simply ask?
Our dedicated Devuan devs would have asked about the source of their data and promptly cleared up the problem for them.

But no, no - can - do - that.

Not a problem, to me Distrowatch was never a place to go for distribution information.
It is just a long list of names.

Thank you for your input.

Best,

A.

zapper · 2023-10-20 03:07:14

Altoid wrote:

Hello:
zapper wrote:
... kidding obviously.
Of course. 8^D
A.

Sarcasm is entirely too much fun for me sometimes I admit.

The officially official Devuan Forum!

#26 2023-10-19 13:03:09

Re: Ustable and Testing Systemd.

#27 2023-10-19 21:56:36

Re: Ustable and Testing Systemd.

#28 2023-10-20 03:07:14

Re: Ustable and Testing Systemd.

Board footer