On Friday 04 of July 2014 00:09:03 Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 23.06.14 16:23, Pavel Raiskup (prais...@redhat.com) wrote:
> > $ cat /etc/postgresql/postgresql@com_example
> > PGDATA=/some/path/pg/com_example
> > PGPORT=@SOMEPORT@
> > $ systemctl start postgresql@com_example
> >
> > Would you see something bad on that approach (please, take into
> > account that we would not stop supporting the old way, we just want to
> > make future configuration easier and straight-forward).
>
> Unit files are configuration files.
Kind of - but not so "pure" configuration files because we can not mark
them %config based on packaging guildelines.
> It's OK to copy unit files from
> /usr/lib/systemd/system into /etc/systemd/system and edit it there.
Copying does not work for us (copied service file is no longer packager's
responsibility - which may seem like a benefit but it is at the expense of
admin's comfort). Drop-in feature would be OK from this POV (.. but see
below the downsides.. ).
> I'd always advise against inventing addition configuration files that
> are neither the daemons own, nor systemd's.
I hope we can call this as a systemd's configuration, or no? It sounds
like EnvironmentFile is also starting to be deprecated, is it so?
The first neat benefit about this is that the configuration file may be
sourced by any shell script. The second benefit is that user doesn't need
to bother with so long directory names:
$ cat /etc/systemd/system/postgresql@com.example.d/redef_sth.conf
[service]
Environ=PGDATA=_Pathname_without_spaces_
---
Little off-topic, but imo worth saying. What I think we miss in systemd
in this regard is (because there are some convenience scripts trying to
automatize usual admin's tasks - and these are dependant on systemd's
configuration):
* Automatic way of exporting service's environment. Something like:
$ systemctl environment postgresql.service
PGDATA=/path/to/a/data/dir
PGPORT=5433
The 'systemctl show -p Environment' does not work for us, because it
does not expand contents of EnvironmentFile :(. Also white-space
problems ..
* I feel that you try to "standardize" the place where services are
configured. What about to have some "standard" location with
files in EnvironementFile= format. Could we then mark those as
%config in spec file?
Pavel
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
