On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Colin Guthrie <gm...@colin.guthr.ie> wrote: > 'Twas brillig, and Umut Tezduyar at 12/02/13 12:00 did gyre and gimble: >> If I am not mistaken, moving "getty@tty1.service" and "remote-fs.target" >> to $systemunitdir will cause them to be shown as "disabled" on >> "systemctl status .unit" even though they are enabled. These unit files >> have "[Install]" sections and when there is "[Install]" section on them, >> systemd will look for a symbolic link in /etc to determine if the unit >> is enabled/disabled. >> >> If the mentioned unit files are moving to $systemunitdir, then their >> [Install] section needs to be removed as well so systemd can treat them >> as "static" unit files. > > Should we not just drop them completely? > > AFAIK, most distros don't ship those files but instead recreate them in > %post install scripts. Certainly, I've created distro-wide rpm-lint > rules that prevents any package from shipping any files inside > /etc/systemd/system/ (links or real units), and ditto for udev rules > etc. I'm very much trying to promote a tidy /etc these days :)
Eventually we can, and I would support that. I was thinking of keeping them around since a lot of source-based folks will not spot the difference and distros and SAs can now mask them out and use an unpatched upstream release. Either way fine with me, I just want them removed from /etc in the end. Auke _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
