Hello Zbigniew, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek [2016-07-04 22:20 +0000]: > I think we should instead enhance target units to provide missing > functionality. The most important thing would be to have something > like PartOf, but more nicely configured. PartOf=graphical-kde.target > would do the trick, but it would need to be configured in each > unit separately, which would mean that we'd need to duplicate each > unit for each target, which is unacceptable. I don't see a nice > way to achieve this with the current set of options. What about > adding DependenciesPartOf=yes|no on the target unit, with "yes" > meaning that we automatically add PartOf= dependencies to any service > which has a Wants= or Requires= dependency to the target.
That sounds good to me, and indeed targets sound like a more natural way than slices. > > * You have to pre-define them, so we would need to have on-disk > > units for all session types like graphical-xfce.target, > > graphical-gnome.target, etc. > > I don't think this is such a big problem. After all it's going to be > a few (3? 5?) units, and a file is needed to provide Description= > and Documentation= anyway. Agreed. > I have to agree with Jóhann that "graphical-" part does not seem necessary. > I'd rather go for "kde-session.target", "gnome-session.target", etc. As predicted, let the bikeshedding begin. :-) I really don't mind much if we call it graphical-$TYPE.target or $TYPE-session.target. > And I don't think that the requirement for a unit file is a hurdle > for step-wise conversion. Once you want to convert, let's say, xfce, > you create xfce-session.target with some Description, and start linking > units to it through .wants or .requires dirs, and that's totally > independent of any other session. Right. The hurdle I meant was that right now every distro or home-grown solution calls the units differently. I. e. so far we had X11@$DISPLAY, graphical-$TYPE.slice, and now $TYPE-session.target. If this becomes a "first submitter wins" then we might miss improvements like the above for a nicer design. Thanks for your input, this is a nice idea! Let's hear a few more opinions before jumping to the implementation (of DependenciesPartOf= in particular). Martin -- Martin Pitt | http://www.piware.de Ubuntu Developer (www.ubuntu.com) | Debian Developer (www.debian.org) _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel