On Tue, 12.02.13 16:25, Kok, Auke-jan H (auke-jan.h....@intel.com) wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Lennart Poettering > <lenn...@poettering.net> wrote: > > On Mon, 11.02.13 16:34, Auke Kok (auke-jan.h....@intel.com) wrote: > > > >> Contrary to it's own packaging guidelines, these symlinks are created > >> in /etc/. While technically not a problem, this makes it harder > >> for folks installing from git that want to override these settings > >> (either masking or otherwise). > >> > >> Moving the links to $(systemunitdir) resolves. > > > > I am not sure we really should do this. Both of these units should be > > allowed to be disabled, and always telling people to mask them sounds a > > bit too much... > > > > Dunno, I am a bit split about this. I see where you are coming from, but > > just making them static sounds like too simple... > > > > (Also, if we make them static we'd drop the [Install] section, as that > > would be pointless then...) > > > > So, I am really unsure... Dunno... Opinions? > > then let's just remove them (the symlinks) altogether.
But that's even more brutal... Also, I think it's nice if "make install" as a developer actually leaves you with a working system where you still get a getty... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
