[systemd-devel] runtime directories for services vs. tmpfiles

[Michael Scherer]

Le mardi 16 juillet 2013 à 17:59 +0100, Colin Guthrie a écrit :
> 'Twas brillig, and Kay Sievers at 16/07/13 17:24 did gyre and gimble:
> > On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Lennart Poettering
> > <lennart at poettering.net> wrote:
> > 
> >> Hmm, I'd like such an automatism, but I'd really prefer if we could come
> >> up with some scheme to automatically determine all tmpfiles snippets in
> >> the package and apply them all automatically. But I am not sure how that
> >> could be done with current RPM.
> >>
> >> In fact, I'd actually like to do the same for the %systemd_post macros,
> >> and suchlike, where people tend to be pretty bad at always listing all
> >> unit files correctly.
> 
> Actually rereading this bit above, I can see the desire for automated
> snippets, but are there not some cases where you would want to avoid
> calling %systemd_post macros for some shipped units? e.g. they may only
> be used internally by others (Requires=, Also= and similar). I think
> such automation might not be good. (just look at the NFS units which I
> think we've finally cleaned up a bit in Mageia - enough to actually work
> at least).
> 
> > Hmm, an rpmlint check for stuff like this maybe is the first step? At
> > least people who care and look at that would fix their stuff?
> 
> Misc was looking at doing most of that. Not sure what you mean about
> naming tho'... do you just mean the folder name (etc vs usr) or just not
> picking very nice unit names?
> 
> For the folder, I put rpmlint checks in Mageia a while ago to ban units,
> tmpfiles and udev rules from shipping in /etc.
> 
> And another to do with non-ghost files in /run or /var/run.
> 
> I had it in my head that I'd spoken to Misc about this at the time I
> wrote them but now I have a paranoid fear that maybe I didn't... They
> are simple enough anyway, so if they are not upstream and have instead
> been reimplemented then it's no great loss, but apologies if forgot to
> ping you at the time Misc (and I've seen you twice in person since then
> too!!)
> 
> Patches here. Can't check if it's upstream yet as rpmlint.zarb.org is
> down for now...

We are now on sf.net.

And someone already contacted me to get the patches, I said i was ok on
the principle, but from the code point of view, it could have been
refactored ( but I didn't do it yet );

IE having a structure like :
['regexp','name-of-exception','message'], have it exposed in the
configuration and have a generic module using this, so every
distribution could add them.

IIRC, Suse do have this kind of patchs, but I didn't merged them yet.
 

-- 
Michael Scherer