'Twas brillig, and David W. Hodgins at 23/05/12 20:46 did gyre and gimble: > On Wed, 23 May 2012 14:38:09 -0400, Colin Guthrie > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> NAK. No it's not redundant it's very important. The symlinks *will* be >> broken when run via the installer due to the $::prefix as they will >> point to "non-existent" paths in /lib/systemd/ (not to >> /mnt/lib/systemd...) so I treat any symlink that exists (even if it >> points to an invalid unit) as "valid" here. > > Wouldn't it have been better to use relative symlinks then?
Yes ideally, but this would require a change at the systemd side too so it's somewhat complicated. In the future I think it will be somewhat moot anyway (I'd like to investigate using systemd in the installer itself and then using systemd-nspawn to be able to introspect and manipulate the state of everything - thus avoiding all this manual poking altogether which is IMO much cleaner. Col -- Colin Guthrie colin(at)mageia.org http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited http://www.tribalogic.net/ Open Source: Mageia Contributor http://www.mageia.org/ PulseAudio Hacker http://www.pulseaudio.org/ Trac Hacker http://trac.edgewall.org/
