[arch-dev-public] Switching to systemd by default in new installations

Thomas Bächler thomas at archlinux.org
Sun Oct 7 13:43:13 EDT 2012

Am 07.10.2012 19:29, schrieb Dave Reisner:
> On Sun, Oct 07, 2012 at 06:49:46PM +0200, Thomas Bächler wrote:
>> Tom and I discussed this on IRC, so I'll just throw it in here.
>> I'd like to make the following changes to our packages:
>> * Remove initscripts and sysvinit from the base group.
>> * Add systemd-sysvcompat to the base group.
> I'd really like to get rid of the /bin/systemd symlink if we're going to
> do this. I suppose it can just be part of the news item we post.

Why did you even introduce this symlink in the first place? Why did you
not remove this symlink _before_ we told everyone to use
init=/bin/systemd on their command line? If you knew this symlink was
going to disappear eventually, why not tell everyone to use
init=/usr/lib/systemd/systemd from the beginning? (Not trying to be
rude, I really need a history lesson on this.)

>> As not all packages are equipped with systemd units yet, a compatibility
>> layer exists: You can install the initscripts package, which does not
>> depend on sysvinit any longer (and thus doesn't conflict with
>> systemd-syscompat). A new initscripts installation will come with an
>> empty DAEMONS array by default. Once you add rc.d scripts to DAEMONS,
>> systemd will generate compatibility units for those services, or enable
>> the systemd unit if a unit with the same name exists.
> This "compatability" layer is still a mess with packages shipping rc.d
> files which don't match up with the unit file name. I proposed a
> solution for this in initscripts that involved keeping a static list of
> exceptions in arch-daemons rather than peppering packages with symlinks
> full of lies, and it appears that nothing has been done yet. This
> _must_ to be fixed first.

In the current status, only a small number of people will even need it,
and they will only specify services which do not have a unit at all -
and nothing is broken there. I don't really see the problem - can't we
expect our users to gradually remove the compatibility DAEMONS over
time? Do we really have to hold their hands?

Can you give a link to your proposed patches? I am really not against
improving this, I just don't see it as a showstopper.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 897 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/attachments/20121007/256f12ac/attachment.asc>

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list