hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 17, 2025 22:13 UTC (Sun) by bluca (subscriber, #118303)
In reply to: hope not tied to SystemD by NYKevin
Parent article: Finding a successor to the FHS

> If systemd is required to comply with the standard

Can you quote the parts that where that is the case?

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 18, 2025 3:41 UTC (Mon) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link] (7 responses)

As I explained to you in another subthread, I already quoted that part of the spec upthread: https://lwn.net/Articles/1034093/

To be clear, this is not "optional" or ancillary information. It is the only way to discover the path to one of the specified directories.

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 18, 2025 8:50 UTC (Mon) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link] (6 responses)

You are mistaken, this is most definitely optional and ancillary information.

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 18, 2025 9:26 UTC (Mon) by rschroev (subscriber, #4164) [Link]

If it is meant as optional and ancillary information, might I suggest rewriting it?

"Instead of constructing the arch-id and $libdir manually, you can query $libdir for the primary architecture of the system by invoking systemd-path system-library-arch on systems that support it". Or something similar.

The way it is written now, very much gives the impression that invoking systemd-path system-library-arch is the one and only way.

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 18, 2025 17:27 UTC (Mon) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link] (4 responses)

In a spec that describes the layout of the filesystem, the path to one of the specified directories is not "ancillary" information. It is a core part of the spec.

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 18, 2025 17:41 UTC (Mon) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link] (3 responses)

The path is not related in any way, shape or form to any tool. It's distribution and architecture dependent, and that's why there's a convenience utility available.

I assure you that out of ~60000 packages building right now in Debian, and however many are in Ubuntu, exactly _zero_ use systemd-path to query the library directory at build time. A significant fraction of those _will_ need to explicitly know what the exact path is, and they won't use that tool for it.

It's just a utility provided for convenience, it is not part of any specification.

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 21, 2025 7:06 UTC (Thu) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link] (1 responses)

> it is not part of any specification.

Good, then you should have no objection to rewording that sentence in a way that clarifies it is non-normative.

I'm glad we're in agreement on that much, at least.

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 21, 2025 10:15 UTC (Thu) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link]

Feel free to send a PR to adjust any wording of any sentence of any paragraph, and it will be discussed in its own merit

hope not tied to SystemD

Posted Aug 21, 2025 10:14 UTC (Thu) by bluca (subscriber, #118303) [Link]

> I assure you that out of ~60000 packages building right now in Debian, and however many are in Ubuntu, exactly _zero_ use systemd-path to query the library directory at build time. A significant fraction of those _will_ need to explicitly know what the exact path is, and they won't use that tool for it.

This is not a hyperbole btw, I really mean it.

Number of packages calling systemd-path in debian/rules to find per-arch libdir: zero out of 30000

https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=path%3Adebian%2Fru...

Number of packages using at least one other mean (a specific makefile include file that defines a specific makefile var, none of which are related to systemd): ~5000 out of ~30000

https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=path%3Adebian%2Fru...