On Tue, 10.06.14 13:58, Mike Gilbert (flop...@gentoo.org) wrote: > > Symlinks should probably just be considered different type of file, that > > have a contents and stuff. The contents is usually a file name, and > > there's a size limit, but other than that it's just a magic kind of > > file, where the symlink destination is the conents. That's how git > > handles this, for example. > > > > I have the suspicion that this is really something to fix in your > > package manager. It should learn to handle symlink upgrades the same way > > as configuration file upgrades.... > > The problem with installing these symlinks as part of a package is > that the user may have removed them from /etc/systemd using systemctl > disable. The next time they install systemd, the package puts the > symlinks right back.
Again, that's exactly what happens for configuration files too if you use automake: on "make install" they are replaced by the original, upstream versions. Why is recreating the symlinks bad, if overriding the config files isn't? > Gentoo's Portage package manager has functionality to protect modified > config files under /etc from being overwritten during reinstalls and > upgrades. However, this protection does not apply to files which have > been removed entirely by the sysadmin. Well, this really sounds like a package manager deficiency. It should be able to manage symlinks properly. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
