On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 04:03:33PM +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Sat, 2014-06-07 at 07:42 -0500, William Giokas wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 01:07:08PM +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > Currently, systemd symlinks ~/.local/share/systemd/user to > > > ~/.config/systemd/user. I'd prefer to not have that symlink. I'd want the > > > two locations have different semantics, analogous to the separation > > > between > > > /usr/lib/systemd/user and /etc/systemd/user, i.e. service upstreams should > > > install units to ~/.local/share/systemd/user and users should customize in > > > ~/.config/systemd/user. > > > > For me this is a directory, not a symlink. > > By "this", do you mean ~/.local/share/systemd/user? I don't know how > that got created. The current systemd code creates the symlink, unless > ~/.local/share/systemd/user already exists (so on your machine the > symlink won't be created, unless you remove the directory first). > > > > I suppose there are very few service upstreams that install their software > > > to the user home directory, but I happen to be writing such software > > > myself. > > > My project is just a toy, though, but I think the general approach of > > > installing a user service to the user home directory makes sense, as it > > > avoids the need to have root access. > > > > > > So, would a patch that removes the symlinking be accepted? > > > > So for user services there are 3 directories that packages can be, > > checked in order: > > > > ~/.config/systemd/user > > /etc/systemd/user/ > > /usr/lib/systemd/user > > > > I don't see a reason to have a fourth one 'for packages' in a users home > > directory. Both directories are "supported", i.e. you can drop a unit using either path, and it will be used by systemd. A symlink is used to avoid having two directories. Your usecase hasn't been brought up before, so there was little reason to have two.
> The same reasons apply that apply for the /etc and /usr/lib separation: > it makes sense to keep upstream units separate from local stuff. > > If you think that it doesn't make sense to support the rare kind of > services that are meant to be installed in the home directory, then ok, > I can live with that. But then I wonder why systemd bothers looking at > all at ~/.local/share/systemd/user as it currently does. So far nobody raised this subject, but systemd --user is still relatively unused, so maybe that's why. Lennart, do you have any master plan here? Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
