[systemd-devel] [PATCH] networkd: disable tmpfiles and sysusers bits associated with networkd

[Łukasz Stelmach]

It was <2014-12-02 wto 00:35>, when Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Mon, 24.11.14 09:30, Łukasz Stelmach (l.stelmach at samsung.com) wrote:
>
>> It was <2014-11-21 pią 21:36>, when Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> > On Fri, 21.11.14 17:07, Łukasz Stelmach (l.stelmach at samsung.com) wrote:
>> >
>> >> On a system configured without networkd and sysusers there still needs
>> >> to be the unnecessary systemd-network user, otherwise systemd-tmpfiles
>> >> fails to start.
>> >> 
>> >> Move information associated with networkd in tmpfiles.d and sysusers.d
>> >> to separate files. Do not install it if netwrorkd is not enabled.
>> >
>> > In principle looks OK, but I'd prefer if we would write this out with
>> > m4 (see etc.conf.m4) and keep it in the current files, rather than
>> > split this up in numerous files.
>> >
>> > Especially in the case of /run/systemd/netif this actually matters: if
>> > we split that out into its own tmpfiles snippet, then packagers would
>> > most likely put that in its own RPM/DEB if they split out those
>> > daemons. But this is not advisable in this case, as sd-network (which
>> > will eventually be a public API of libsystems) needs the directory to
>> > be around to install an inotify watch. If the directory doesn't exist,
>> > and the API is used it will fail entirely, which is suboptimal, given
>> > that networkd might be installed later on, and things should then just
>> > start to work.
>> 
>> Will it be necessary for this directory to be owned by systemd-network
>> even without networkd?
>
> Yes. If networkd is compile-time enable the dir should exist and be
> properly owned, even if it networkd is split off into a separate
> binary package and currently not installed.

And what if the networkd is disabled? Does the directory must exist? Now
if networkd is disabled /run/systemd/netif* are not in
tmpfiles.d/systemd.conf. Is this correct?

If these directories are (going to be) required even with networkd being
compile-time disabled, who should own them?

> Your patch in the version Zbigniew commited looks correct in this
> regard!

Then, I suppose the answers to the above questions are not crucial,
however, I am still curious to know them.

Kind regards,
-- 
Łukasz Stelmach
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 489 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20141202/50c30759/attachment.sig>