On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 01:23:00AM +0100, Reindl Harald wrote: > > > Am 15.01.2013 01:16, schrieb Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek: > >> I don't think it's as bad as you portray it, but I have an intern > >> software engineer that I will be making systemd-analyze (the non-plot > >> parts - the plot parts should be replaced by bootchart IMO) rewrite in > >> C, so hopefully we can put some of this behind us soon enough. > > I think that fixing a trivial packaging error (one line of missing > > Depends:) with a rewrite from scratch is the wrong way to go. > > The available man-hours would be much better spent improving > > systemd-analyze to provide better diagnostics, nicer output, more > > features, etc. Rewriting it in C serves little purpose: neither it is > > a performance critical program, nor does it run in initrd. Nor > > is it going to be easier to develop. To the contrary, as long as it is > > written in Python, it is trivial to dynamically load the graphical > > libraries only when necessary. With C code this is possible too, but > > requires _much_ more code. > > that is all correct > > but as long the COMMAND-LINE systemd-analyze with the simple output > "716ms (kernel) + 1457ms (initramfs) + 32073ms (userspace) = 34247ms" > hardly needs graphical libraries and growing deps there goes something > wrong, the same for "systemd-analyze blame", both have no graphics > involved It doesn't. Graphical libraries are loaded only when used.
Of course systemd-analyze is _packaged_ as dependent on graphical libraries, because the split to save a few megabytes on a server installation is not worth the maintainer's (or admin's) time. Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
