[systemd-devel] Another attempt: Making dependencies properly overridable

[Lennart Poettering]

On Sun, 19.04.15 17:08, Andrei Borzenkov (arvidjaar at gmail.com) wrote:

> What about Wants-=e.service in dropin? Dropins are processed
> after .{wants,requires}.d and has advantage that you can remove also
> static dependency from unit definition file, not only mask another
> directory.

This has been requested before, but I'd be very careful with this. I
really don't want to turn this into a complex language really, and
especially not in one that knows different kinds of assignments.  I
mean, already we aren't simple .ini files anymore, since we allow
assigning the empty string for resets, and allow multiple assignments
that add things up. But I'd *really* like to avoid deviating even
further from the simplicity that ini files are. 

Or let's say it like this: I am very keen on keeping the file
structure as simple as "just a list of key-value pairs", possibly with
[sections] and comments, and that's it.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat