Uoti Urpala <uoti.urp...@pp1.inet.fi> writes: > Roger Leigh wrote: >> Can't we just do things the Debian way, and just provide them directly >> as conffiles in /etc? It's nice that systemd provides its mechanism >> to symlink/include the units provided elsewhere, but is this either >> necessary or desirable on a Debian system? > > Not having the files in /etc by default does have technical advantages. > It's easier to see what is local non-default configuration. Original > default file is always available in a known location (and very easy to > revert to, temporarily for testing or permanently). You can use > ".include /lib/defaultsfile" then override some value, which in most > cases is more maintainable than the 3-way merging required by > "traditional" conffiles.
Perhaps then the packages that right now ship symlinks to /lib/systemd/ stuff could be changed to ship a file that consists of a single .include line? That way, they can be treated as normal conffiles without any of the disadvantages of a symlink. diffing and whatnot will magically work, and we'd still have the benefit of having /lib/systemd/ separate from the /etc/systemd/ overrides. This at the cost of some extra processing due to the include. -- |8] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87y5p1ryoh....@luthien.mhp
