Hello gustavo panizzo, * gustavo panizzo <[email protected]> [210402 19:49]: > > I don't think that the alternative system is a good idea > > > > It is an extension of your initial idea, I don't want to exclusively own > iptables.service and then conflict with other firewall managers (ufw, arno, > ferm, etc) that may want to do the same, I have discussed this with > their maintainers. > > I want users to be allowed to install more than one firewall manager at > the same time but not run more than one at the same time.
So far none have showed up, and the alternatives just add complexity with no gain. They also need maintainer scripts to run during install/upgrade time, adding complexity and using up time on all systems. I strongly believe alternatives should only be added if there is a demonstrated need for them, AND consensus between the involved packages (or via policy). It appears no other packages are involved, however. I think for the systemd services one could have used Alias= and similar, if other packages show interest. Out of curiosity: does changing the alternatives run `systemctl daemon-reload` to pick up changes to the symlinks? Best, Chris
