Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> writes:

> Two more things went missing: Simon's suggestion on the versioned
> dependencies on the virtual packages,

Ah, yes, I'm sorry, I talked myself out of that and then completely forgot
the previous discussion so didn't say anything.

My concern is that it felt like we were providing a detailed description
of an entirely normal dependency management situation (you always have to
depend on the version of a package you use that provides the interface
you're using unless it's old enough that it doesn't matter), and I wasn't
sure what was special about this one that warranted spelling that out
other than the need to add the version constraint to both stanzas.  So I
kept that part but omitted the rest.

The phrasing Simon proposed I think would be appropriate if we thought
most packages would need a version constraint, but I didn't think the
functionality was changing that quickly.  Am I wrong about that?  It felt
awkward to include the version constraints and then tell people to remove
them if they're going to be able to remove them 95% of the time, but I
don't know if that's the case.

Maybe the right way to do this is just have two examples, one as the
default and another if you're using tmpfiles.d functionality added in a
specific version of systemd that's newer than the version shipped with the
stable version of Debian prior to the one you're targeting.

> and the link from the tmpfiles section to the service directory section
> (given it was moved).

It's there (last sentence):

+If the files or directories are only needed by a system service or
+otherwise should only be created when that service is running, packages
+should define those files and directories in the ``systemd`` unit for the
+service (and, for alternative init systems, in the configuration for that
+init system) instead of using the ``tmpfiles.d`` mechanism.  See
+:ref:`s-services-dirs` for more details.

You don't need to spell out the section title; Sphinx defaults to adding
that for you based on the heading that you're linking to.  (I think we are
excessively explicit in a bunch of places in Policy currently due to a
conversion artifact from DebianDoc-XML.)

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)              <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply via email to