Bug#946456: systemd: Provide systemd-sysusers as an independent package

[Michael Biebl]

Hi Emmanuel

On Mon, 09 Dec 2019 11:18:13 +0100 Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg at apache.org> wrote:
> Package: systemd
> Version: 244-3
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Would it be possible to move systemd-sysusers into an independent package?
> That would allow packages to use its declarative user creation syntax even
> on systems where elogind is installed and conflicts with systemd.


The problem with splitting out systemd-sysusers is, that the binary
systemd-sysusers binary links against libsystemd-shared (an internal
system library which changes its soname on every new upstream release).

 $ objdump -x /bin/systemd-sysusers  | grep NEEDED
  NEEDED               libc.so.6
  NEEDED               libsystemd-shared-244.so

Keep in mind that during a dist-upgrade, the systemd-sysusers binary
might be called at arbitrary, it would be quasi-essential.

This complicates matters a lot.

We could move libsystemd-shared from the systemd package to the new
systemd-sysusers package. But this will make the systemd package very
brittle, as the binaries from the systemd package require
libsystemd-shared as well. So not a option, really, as during partial
upgrades, the new systemd-sysuser package might be unpacked with the old
systemd package still being installed (and non functional binaries from
the systemd package).

We could move libsystemd-shared into a separate package, which is
so-versioned, so multiple versions can be installed at the same time
(systemd-shared-XXX), ensuring that during partial upgrades, binaries
continue to work.
This is not a compelling solution either, as this would mean, that on
each new upstream release, we'd have to go through the NEW queue.

Last but not least, we'd have the option to link systemd-sysusers
statically against libsystemd-shared. This would have the downside, that
it significantly increases the size of the binary. So we'd hurt the
overwhelming majority of the Debian users for questionable gain.

Imo, the real problem is, that the elogind package chose an approach
which conflicts with the systemd package. Imo, elogind should be an
addon package, which can be installed alongside systemd (and there would
be no libelogind0 conflicting with libsystemd0).

This boils down to a problem in elogind, which their maintainers need to
figure out. I gave my feedback on this matter in [1].

Regards,
Michael

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=923244#20

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/attachments/20200128/d39c5dc6/attachment.sig>