[pkg-go] Bug#1020691: debos should depend on systemd-resolved

Arnaud Rebillout arnaudr at kali.org
Mon Oct 24 14:00:11 BST 2022

On 24/10/2022 17:34, Christopher Obbard wrote:
> I have proposed[1] to check if systemd-resolved is available at
> runtime, to at least let users know *why* name resolution doesn't work
> inside their fakemachine over letting the user debugging it themselves.
> [1]:https://github.com/go-debos/fakemachine/pull/115

That's nice! I thought of it as well, and I was wondering if 
systemd-resolved (and possibly other services) should be listed under 
Requires= instead of Wants= (talking about 
https://github.com/go-debos/fakemachine/blob/main/machine.go#L288). But 
then, I noticed commit 4c60b85a8302f0fa544adae73f0649726034711c, and why 
using Wants= is the intention. So your approach works better.

> Perhaps we should add systemd-resolved to Suggests in
> debos/fakemachine? Adding it as a Depends/Recommends would break users
> who have some other package on their machine handling name resolution.
> @Arnaud, how does that sound?

Well, I'm not sure for the packaging part. If fakemachine needs 
systemd-resolved to be functional, then it should be a Depends. That's 
what Depends is for.

At a quick glance, there's no reverse dependencies of fakemachine / 
debos. So the only users that would be surprised by the change are the 
ones who installed it explicitly, so we can assume those are technical 
users and they'll find their way? But then, what if there are some 
installations on servers (think builders), and the upgrade breaks the 
name resolution? Not a nice surprise.

OTOH, an error message saying that "/lib/systemd/systemd-resolved is 
missing", plus a Suggests: systemd-resolved, both together gives a 
strong hint regarding what should be done. It sounds sensible as well.

Sorry, that's not really a clear answer :)


Arnaud Rebillout / Offensive Security / Kali Linux Developer
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-go-maintainers/attachments/20221024/728ef834/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list