Will systemd support the kind of flexibility that Gentoo provides with the /etc/conf.d structure?
I can change the behavior of any file in /etc/init.d by editing or creating a corresponding file in /etc/conf.d. Sometimes this configuration can be quite extensive - modifying command-line parameters that are passed to the program or allowing giving sysadmins to add or override dependencies without ever needing to modify any file in /etc/init.d On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Kay Sievers <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 07:04, Michael Biebl <[email protected]> wrote: > > 2010/9/8 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <[email protected]>: > >> - calling any of /etc/init.d scripts is bad, as it will call openrc > >> and it will bring all dependencies on its own, including services > >> managed by systemd that are up already. This means we better disable > >> sysv support there (more on this later). > > > > Not sure if disabling sysv support is good idea. > > It's definitely the longer-term goal. There are a few missing pieces, > like native fsck, storage/raid setup, native reboot/shutdown which > needs to move to native systemd services, without calling into any of > the old sysv stuff. > > At that point we have a well defined way to bring up a system and can > offer a way to unify what distros are doing here. It's a bit what we > did with udev/hotplug over the last couple of years. Almost all > distros have pretty much exactly the same stuff here, while it was all > completely different when we started. > > At that point we get all the remaining sysv things out of the boot and > the basic operations, and we can cripple sysv just to "some additional > service" that makes sure, all the remaining things which use sysv are > still started as expectd, but nothing more. We would probably stop to > allow to randomly mix and have interdependencies between sysv and > systemd native things. > > Fot the Gentoo case, I don't think there is a sane way to map the > openrc things into systemd units. And doing it the hard way, leave it > behind, and move the few missing pieces into systemd might be the > better approach. > > It would be even funny, if the problems with openrc, and it's > incompatibility with sysv, would lead to the currently most advanced > systemd setup. :) > > Kay > _______________________________________________ > systemd-devel mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel >
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
