On Wednesday 2020-08-26 16:49, Richard Brown wrote:
On Wed, 2020-08-26 at 16:41 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Wednesday 2020-08-26 16:22, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
Which means we need to adjust xdm and lsb [for pidof]. Where the question is, if they really need this requires, as procps is really something always installed.
Always?
$ rpm -e procps --test error: Failed dependencies: procps is needed by (installed) zypper-1.14.37- lp152.2.5.4.x86_64
and inside the SUSE containers that you, Richard et al are working on/towards, I imagine there may not even be a zypper present.
Inside those containers there will almost certainly be 'busybox-procps'[...] So Thorsten's question is valid, packages should only require 'procps' if they really, really need _the procps package_, else it should always be safe to assume the system will have something that provides procps functionality.
That is what I was aiming at: it's not safe to assume so in the context of the upcoming change of the provider of the pidof utility. As shown, almost nothing depends on procps. Such system can exist, e.g. dnf folks that have thrown out zypper :-) If the /usr/bin/pidof file now moves from sysvinit-tools to procps, but procps is not installed (and hence also will not be updated for said dnf system), the system as a whole no longer has /usr/bin/pidof. xdm would therefore need a Require: /usr/bin/pidof. /etc/X11/xdm/RunChooser:pidof -s kdm > /dev/null 2>&1 /etc/X11/xdm/RunChooser:if test $? -eq 0 -a -x $kdmdesktop ; then ... /etc/X11/xdm/Xsession:/sbin/pidof -s wdm > /dev/null 2>&1 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org