Just link in a huge library into security critical code, what could go wrong?!
Just link in a huge library into security critical code, what could go wrong?!
using this library should be preferred in order to avoid code duplication
Then, if you're not intimately familiar with systemd you might wonder which is more standardized and less likely change between the API and the protocol. Maybe you make the reasonable assumption that it's the API.Then, you look at the reference code and see some reasonably nontrivial stuff that's a bit outside the maintainer's remit to add.
All of that is going to lead people in the direction of linking the library rather than reimplementing from scratch.
> In the past, I have been telling anyone who wanted to listen that if all you want is sd_notify() then don't bother linking to libsystemd, since the protocol is stable and should be considered the API, not our C wrapper around it. After all, the protocol is so trivial
I'm actually surprised that they added the note about code duplication after adding the standalone implementation specifically so people won't do that.
The takeway that sensible people go away with is that core critical infrastructure needs to be properly funded, and people need to stop harassing open source maintainers.
Idiots instead rant about "muh systemd" and use it to attack other maintainers.