D-Bus-1.8.0: messagebus group and user already exist

[Arthur Radley]

The current development version LFS now creates adm, messagebus, and systemd-journal groups and a messagebus user as part of your Systemd experiment. The D-Bus steps of the current development version of BLFS attempts to recreate the messagebus group and user resulting in an error.

[bdubbs@…]

I'll leave this for now, but we have not started to look at BLFS in any depth for changes needed for the current LFS -dev book. As a minimum, several packages in BLFS need to be pulled as they are in LFS. D-Bus is one of those.

[Arthur Radley]

Okay. Fair enough. All of this belongs to you, and I am just a user of it. But I'm not on the Systemd train with you and the other devs. It would have been my preference that LFS remain with SysVinit only and that Systemd LFS remain a separate book maintained by those interested in it. Systemd never "fixed" anything for me. In fact, it gave me new problems and ruined Fedora for me. That was when I stopped years of thinking about LFS and starting building it. Now, I believe, it is about ruin BLFS for me, too. Anyway, because of what I have learned from LFS and you and the others over the last few years, I think I can sort of go my on way and carry on. That is, at least until everything requires Systemd. My apologies for even reporting this issue. I will stop doing such things. Adieu.

[bdubbs@…]

Please continue to report what you think are issues.

BTW, the intent for LFS is to not use systemd if you don't want it. The only thing you will need to do is omit the systemd package. We haven't started looking at BLFS in detail yet but the intent is to allow for users like you who do not want to install systemd.

[ken@…]

Personally, I hope that the eudev hint will get updated when we approach the next LFS release - to show that e.g. dbus is not *required* for udev (although it will probably be wanted in a desktop, and many people will want to rebuild eudev once the deps for gudev are in place).

Also, current BLFS theoretically supports all versions of LFS >= 7.0 ( versions before that need earlier bootscripts, someone reported an rpc problem on 7.4 last week ), and no LFS releases currently have any of the packages recently added to LFS-svn. So definitely some "conditional" rewording will be needed.

But LFS-svn at the moment is for experienced builders, and enthusiasts. There has been a lot of change - people using jhalfs will not care, but everyone else using their own scripts is in for some fun. I expect that both these categories will know enough to either spot the problems in advance, or to know how to fix them. In particular, I expect people to remember which packages they had to add to LFS!

This ticket is useful - maybe we should change the title to something along the lines of "BLFS changes required for LFS-sysv-systemd" and use it as a catch-all place to note what needs attention ?

At the moment I'm still trying to absorb the systemd changes in LFS - my own scripts now build a working LFS with eudev and _current_ LFS bootscripts, and I'm fairly confident that the systemv-on-systemd build will work when I test it. But I'm not yet confident about what I need to add so that I can successfully convert it to boot systemd (keyboard, font, dhcp), let alone how to convert my own private bootscripts (fix cpufreq, run a smartd check at boot), nor the changes to ensure that the various daemons will be started by systemd (e.g. postfix, nfs That will probably take me the rest of this month, maybe a bit longer depending how hard it is to convert my own initscripts to work with systemd. After that I intend to build the parts of BLFS which I use on my normal desktops, so I'll hopefully be able to fix _some_ of the issues.

[bdubbs@…]

Fixed at revision 13003