[systemd-devel] systemd-network-wait-online symlinks to systemd-networkd

[Kirill Elagin]

You're welcome.

Please, tell the PMS guys to add this to the spec and ask the Paludis guys
to implement this as well.


--
Кирилл Елагин


On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 1:33 AM, Mike Gilbert <floppym at gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Mike Gilbert <floppym at gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Kirill Elagin <kirelagin at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 3:24 AM, Mike Gilbert <floppym at gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Lennart Poettering
> >>> <lennart at poettering.net> wrote:
> >>> > On Tue, 10.06.14 13:58, Mike Gilbert (floppym at 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?
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> People don't generally remove config files; they just make changes.
> >>>
> >>> On the other hand, removing the symlinks would be a very typical
> >>> action due to the way systemctl disable works. There is some ambiguity
> >>> as to what a missing symlink means: did the sysadmin remove it, or did
> >>> it never exist in the first place?
> >>
> >>
> >> But there is `equery f`, so it shouldn't be too hard to figure this out,
> >> right?
> >>
> >
> > It is one thing to query the package database with a tool designed for
> > users. It is quite another to modify our package manager to use the
> > information in an intelligent way. Patches are welcome, as always.
>
> Actually, I think I have talked myself into working on such an
> enhancement myself. Thanks.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/attachments/20140612/c88d002e/attachment.html>