Am 17.12.2015 um 17:03 schrieb Reindl Harald:
Am 17.12.2015 um 16:57 schrieb Lennart Poettering:
> On Thu, 17.12.15 10:50, Matthew Miller (mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org) wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 04:40:16PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>>> Nope, that's not the point to make. We ship tons of stuff you don't
>>> always need, but why is this stuff that matters? Is it *that* large?
>>
>> "Ship" and "require in the most minimal application-only install
case"
>> are different. And "eh, it's not that large" is the approach
that's
>> lead us to having a collective minimal set that is undeniably unwieldy.
>> If, instead, every package at the base level would take modularity as a
>> baseline principle, we'd be in a lot better and more flexible state.
>>
>>> Does it have such heavy otherwise unneeded deps?
>>
>> In some cases, yes. In others, it's deps that don't seem individually
>> heavy but they add up.
>
> I am not sure I can read this any other way than "Nope, I won't be
> specific with numbers and stuff, I just have the 'feeling' that
> systemd is large and has huge deps"
read it they way: *anything* which is *not missed* when it's not
installed should not be installed - period - there is nothing to dicuss
about
OK, you want numbers
full featured VM running authoritative DNS for hundrets
of zones while bind and rsyslog would be enough
______________________________
whole operating system: 795 MB
systemd: 24 MB
systemd-libs: 1.1 MB
______________________________
(100 * 25.1) / 795 = 3,16%
sorry, 25 MB in each container *is bloat* and you pull deps
like dbus and it's dep-chain not needed to run a single process
which has no business for IPC since there is no other process
not so long ago systemd unconditionally pulled "libmicrohttpd"
as dependency - most deps have chains and when you get rid of
one package you can get rid of their deps too
yes, many would now argue "but that's not much overhead", but
that overhead on 100, 200, 500 containers makes a total sum