On 20/08/15 13:24, Oxan van Leeuwen wrote: > Hi, > Hi,
> On 18-08-15 01:01, Tomasz Buchert wrote:
> >great! Just nit-picking here, really. And trying to understand
> >AppArmor :).
> You seem to be right, I've committed a patch to remove the m flag.
Ok.
>
> >Yes, I tried without postconf present and the unit failed.
> >
> >>Its output is silenced, and postsrsd fails
> >>when the -d argument is empty anyway.
> >
> >I don't think you want this systemd unit to fail *by default*.
> Hmm, you're right about that. Would a Recommends be good enough, or do we
> really need a hard dependency? I'd like to avoid adding a hard dependency
> only for the systemd unit (since the daemon itself runs fine without
> postfix), and failing is in my opinion the only reasonable option when
> neither postconf nor a configured domain is present.
I think that we either:
* need hard dependency on postfix
* need to have a debconf dialog that goes more or less like that:
- if postconf exists, the domain is taken from there
- if not, the current hostname is taken
- then a debconf dialog is shown prefilled with these defaults
- the obtained domain name is used in init scripts
Waht do you think? Tell me if you need help with the second.
>
> >Sorry, I didn't notice that. I agree, though, that it would make sense
> >to put all configuation in one place.
> I looked a bit further into this, and Debian Policy 9.3.2 says that removing
> the /etc/default file should be supported, so I don't think we can drop the
> defaults from the systemd unit.
I think that a sensible thing to do would be to provide POSTSRSD_OPTS
as 'Environment=...' and then pull a config file with
'EnvironmentFile=-...' (which may contain various configs in comments
too). It seems to be sort-of standard. And, right, if you also use
debconf, then you probably need to pull a file created created in
postinst.
>
> Cheers,
> Oxan
>
Cheers,
Tomasz
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
