[arch-dev-public] Migration to systemd
teg at jklm.no
Tue Aug 14 14:23:38 EDT 2012
On Aug 14, 2012 7:17 PM, "Dave Reisner" <d at falconindy.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 12:09:33PM -0500, Dan McGee wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 11:57 AM, Dave Reisner <d at falconindy.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 06:39:34PM +0200, Andrea Scarpino wrote:
> > >> On Tuesday 14 August 2012 18:34:13 Pierre Schmitz wrote:
> > >> > There are still a lot of unit files missing; we should create a
> > >> > list. It would also be helpful to write down a simple wiki page
> > >> > some guidelines here.
> > >>
> > >> Did I miss something or did you miss the Jan's todo list?
> > >>
> > >> > E.g. I am not sure if we should read those
> > >> > /etc/conf.d/$damon files from the unit files as well or drop these
> > >> > the user should override unit files in /etc.
> > >>
> > >> Indeed, I was wondering if we should adapt our packages to the
layout used by
> > >> the upstream systemd services files. E.g. the upstream proftpd
> > >> /etc/system/proftpd, but our packages installs /etc/conf.d/proftpd.
> > >
> > > So there is no standard for this, and the general recommendation is
> > > if you disagree with the default command line args the service in /lib
> > > provides, you should simply override the service in /etc. If anything,
> > > I'd vote that /etc/conf.d (or whatever other name you give it) should
> > > slowly shrink/disappear over time.
> > What does the non-standard think about distro-provided updates to the
> > units? Seems like with overriding the whole thing rather than small
> > pieces in a separate config file, it isn't obvious to the user when
> > they need to merge updates to the unit files.
> > -Dan
> It's possible to include unit files (.include /lib/systemd/....), though
> in practice, I haven't seen how well this works.
There its also systemd-delta, which makes this much easier to deal with.
More information about the arch-dev-public