On Mon, 24.03.14 19:20, Frederic Crozat ([email protected]) wrote: > Le lundi 24 mars 2014 à 18:58 +0100, Lennart Poettering a écrit : > > > It's simply that the PID file info in the chkconfig header is just > > increadibly useful (since it allows us to identify the main process of a > > service) and I'd really like to make sure we make use of it wherever > > possible. So that chkconfig header bit is what I am interested in, not > > the priority number... > > I must confess I stole the PID file info part and added it in the "LSB" > header parsing, because we sometime have initscripts which such > informations (which is good) and we also sometime would like to have > this information handy, despite the fact we use LSB headers (and not > "Fedora" ones)..
I can't and won't make you stop doing this, but let me just say that I really don't like that you do this, and that this is something I would never merge upstream: We really don't want to extend old standards with private systemd extensions, if we consider those old standards obsolete anyway. If people want to use systemd features they should use systemd files. Compatibility we do for the sake of compatibility only, not do extend standards we consider deeply flawed, and that we'd prfer if they went away sooner rather than later. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
