On Sat, Jul 20, 2013 at 7:03 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <[email protected]> wrote: > Kay Sievers wrote: >>> If you're so particular about keeping primary unit files "clean", may >>> I suggest moving the exception code to vconsole-setup.c? >> >> That's what I meant, yeah, sorry for the confusion. > > Cool, I understand that your desire to keep primary units clean: I'll > write a patch for this. > > In the meantime, could you merge [1/2] assuming it's fine?
No, sorry, the same rule applies to C code as it does to unit files: We do not collect specific exceptions for broken hacks in exotic tools. Means: there will be _zero_ matches on UML strings in systemd to work around the fact that UML "declares" the broken tty0 hack as ok. Such quirk lists of exceptions are not sustainable and will not propagate from UML or any other subsystem to systemd. It sounds fine so far to work around these issues, make things work better in a *generic* way, like gracefully giving up in the running vconsole when it finds out there is no real tty0 to work with. That we can declare as being "robust" or "forgiving", but there will be no specific matches/workarounds in code or unit files for deliberately broken behavior which should just be fixed where it is caused. We just do not support any specific hacks like that, they are wrong at many levels and should be contained or fixed in the subsystem people have decided to do them. Thanks, Kay _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
