[systemd-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tmpfiles.d: split files to cope with split packages.

[Barbieri, Gustavo]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lennart Poettering [mailto:lennart at poettering.net]
> Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 4:22 AM
> To: Barbieri, Gustavo
> Cc: Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek; systemd-devel at lists.freedesktop.org
> Subject: Re: [systemd-devel] [PATCH 1/2] tmpfiles.d: split files to
> cope with split packages.
> 
> On Tue, 30.09.14 14:36, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
> (gustavo.barbieri at intel.com) wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 04:26:38AM +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-
> Szmek wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 06:12:50PM -0300, Gustavo Sverzut
> Barbieri wrote:
> > > > etc.conf was selectively (using m4) using resolved link, now
> this is
> > > > moved to systemd-resolved.conf file. The etc.conf can be
> static and
> > > > does not need to be generated anymore.
> > > >
> > > > systemd.conf was doing all the journal setup, now this is
> moved to
> > > > systemd-journald.conf file.
> > > Is this useful? We don't support journald-less setups.
> >
> > I did forget about this part but it is important, so here it is:
> >
> > I just tested, although journald-less systems are not supported,
> > they work beautifully (as beautify as it can).
> >
> > and we run great without a dbus-daemon, even if not running kdbus
> as
> > systemctl bus is private and we can do with that (I didn't even
> think
> > about that, someone at #systemd alerted me and it will help to
> stop
> > those people that complain about dbus usage and that we could
> "just do
> > socket", the private socket is basically the same, but the
> protocol is
> > a standard and not just some random handcrafted one).
> 
> It's great if this works, and people can do whatever they want with
> the code. But this is nothing we want to support upstream. In
> upstream
> neither udev, nor dbus, nor the journal are optional. If people want
> to make that work, they can do this downstream.
> 
> resolved, networkd, timesyncd are optional, for these it's OK to
> make
> the necessary changes upstream.

It's just cumbersome to have to patch the installed files to split it. Doable, but not good to do.

BR,
-- Gustavo