On 1/3/20 10:05 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 1/3/20 2:33 AM, Sam Hartman wrote: >> Secondly, by using systemd-tmpfiles when we can, we gain support for any >> additional features that are implemented. > > That's where I don't agree. While it's nice to have such a declarative > system, I don't think it's reasonable to impose the implementation of > any change to systemd to all the other init systems. At some point, *we* > must be able to decide. We have decided. Its systemd. Please lets not start this discussion again. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer http://bzed.de http://www.debian.org GPG Fingerprint: ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its u... Bastian Blank
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its u... Thomas Goirand
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its u... Marco d'Itri
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its u... Russ Allbery
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its u... Sam Hartman
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its use in the Deb... Marco d'Itri
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its use in th... Sam Hartman
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its use in th... Thomas Goirand
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its use i... Marco d'Itri
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its u... Thomas Goirand
- Re: opentmpfiles & opensysusers, and its use in the Deb... Bernd Zeimetz