]] Nicholas Bamber Hi,
I would be most grateful if you quoted the way is usually done on email lists. > I would be very grateful if you could have a look. Andreas Barth has > basically repeated the point I made in the third paragraph of my > original post. Yes, and you're both mistaken. systemd is not a normal daemon package, it does not start any daemons, nor replace init merely by being installed. Installing systemd onto a system is about as intrusive to the system as a whole as installing nvi. > Nothing you have said is really reassuring me. You talk about how a > package needs something to make socket activation to work and > sd-daemon.h is a way to do that. Well that file is available in > libsystemd-daemon-dev, and the current package as a dependency on > systemd rather than libsystemd-daemon-dev. It might be right but it > does not feel right. I would suggest you ask the dovecot maintainer why he build-depends on systemd rather than libsystemd-daemon-dev if it is in fact for the reasons I listed. I gave a suggestion as to why he would do so, as well as a reason for why systemd.pc is not in its own package, but as I am not the maintainer of dovecot and there's no way for me to actually know, short of asking, which you can just as easily do yourself. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
