The future of elogind/libelogind0

[Matthias Geiger]

On 05.11.23 18:13, Mark Hindley wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 02:22:26PM +0100, Mark Hindley wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 01:29:38AM +0200, Adam Borowski wrote:
>>> Package: procps
>>> Version: 2:4.0.4-2
>>> Architecture: amd64
>>> Depends: libc6 (>= 2.34), libncursesw6 (>= 6), libproc2-0 (>= 2:4.0.4),
>>> »»» libsystemd0 (>= 254~rc1),
>>>      libtinfo6 (>= 6), init-system-helpers (>= 1.29~)
>>>
>>> And this dependency is not satisfiable by current version of libelogind0;
>> I think we have to grasp this issue and consider the future of elogind.
>>
>> Upstream has been very inactive. The last commit was May 2023[1], the way the
>> code is derived from systemd is difficult and cumbersome and I am sceptical that
>> upstream has the desire and capability to continue maintenance that requires
>> keeping in step with systemd.
>>
>> Within Debian, elogind (despite its flaws and limitations) still works, the real
>> issue is the ABI compatibility of libelogind0 and libsystemd0. As currently
>> deployed, we have no option than try to keep up with systemd. That is always
>> going to be uncomfortable and we are never going to be in control of that.
>>
>> I think we need to consider other options. I have some theoretical avenues to
>> explore (in no particular order):-
>>
>>   - Patch elogind to use libsystemd0 directly. This was considered previously[2]
>>     but rejected because elogind lacks, for example, scopes and slices. I don't
>>     even know if it is practical to fake, emulate or ignore these features.
> I have just uploaded version 252.9-1debian1 to experimental. I have added a
> preliminary patch which enables elogind to use libsystemd0 compatible cgroups
> and dispense with libelogind0. It works for me, after a reboot, but I would
> appreciate wider testing and comments.
>
> Some services will need restarting after libelogind0 is removed and users will
> need to log out and back in. I have handled polkitd in the postinst, but others
> may be required.
>
> I know there has been some recent activity upstream, but that only wrt 253 which
> is still insufficient to address the binary compatibility. And I believe systemd
> 255 will be uploaded to sid soon.
>
> If this approach works for others, I think it will be better as it will decouple
> us from the requirement to constantly play catchup with systemd.
>
> Thoughts and comments?
>
Hi Mark,

thanks for fixing this. I installed elogind from experimental and didn't 
have any issues so far,

but I'm still in the process of setting up this machine so time will 
tell if I run into any bugs.

best,

-- 

Matthias Geiger <werdahias>
Debian Maintainer
"Freiheit ist immer Freiheit des anders Denkenden" -- Rosa Luxemburg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-init-diversity/attachments/20231108/c2216fe6/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_0x18BD106B3B6C5475.asc
Type: application/pgp-keys
Size: 4036 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP public key
URL: <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-init-diversity/attachments/20231108/c2216fe6/attachment.asc>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 840 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/pipermail/debian-init-diversity/attachments/20231108/c2216fe6/attachment.sig>