On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 10:30:48PM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Tue, 27.01.15 15:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek (zbys...@in.waw.pl) wrote: > > > Yes, I think attempting any kind of dependency removal *from loaded > > units* would be very complicated, and would require major surgery to > > current unit engine. And things would become conceptually more complicated, > > which we certainly don't need. > > > > But masking of .wants/ links is something different I think. It is a > > *localized* modification to a single configuration file. We currently > > allow overridding of almost all configuration (units files, files in > > .d directories, recently even generators), but .wants and .requires > > are an exception. I think we should allow this. Apart from current > > use case, it would things more consistent for the user. > > Hmm, I am open to allowing to override the symlinks with symlinks, if > you follow what I mean. But i'd be careful with allowing to override > stuff listed in Wants= in a unit file in /usr, with a symlink in a > .wants/ dir in /etc, if you follow what I mean. Yes, exactly. > But yeah, allowing symlinks to override symlinks makes sense, a patch > for that would be good. > > Lennart
Zbyszek _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
