[systemd-devel] non-merged /usr changes [was: pre-release warnings?]

[Lennart Poettering]

On Tue, 26.05.15 18:52, Martin Pitt (martin.pitt at ubuntu.com) wrote:

> > I really don't see how the xorg.conf.d drop-in should be
> > fedora-specific. That's an upstream X11 thing, and we just picked a
> > name for the file and that's it.
> > 
> > Are you saying Debian patched out supported for /etc/X11/xorg.conf.d?
> 
> No, that of course works if it's present, but Debian wants to
> configure the keyboard layout for the console and other consumers too,
> and parsing Xorg config in kbd/console-setup would be rather weird. So
> Debian uses Xorg's udev support by default, which is essentially
> 
>   KERNEL=="event*", ENV{ID_INPUT_KEY}=="?*",
>   IMPORT{file}="/etc/default/keyboard"

udev is should not be used for configuration. That's simply
wrong. 

> > That said, I think even better would be to maybe make the support for
> > this generic in systemctl: instead of explicitly invoking chkconfig or
> > update-rcd, maybe we can just make systemctl invoke some fixed binary
> > /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-sysv-compat or so with a fixed set of
> > parameters. The distros could then make that a tool (maybe just a
> > shell script) that invokes chkconfig or update-rc.d This would then
> > allow us to remove any chkconfig-specific code from systemd, and would
> > allow all distros to plug-in the tool of their choice without having
> > to patch upstream. What do you think?
> 
> That sounds great. If chkconfig and update-r.cd are/were the only two
> contenders then #ifdef sounds easier, but I don't know about other
> distros like e. g. Gentoo.

Well, chkconfig is the only implementation we support natively right
now. A new compat interface like I proposed would only have to replace
this hookup and all would be good.

> > > http://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-systemd/systemd.git/tree/debian/patches/Fix-paths-in-man-pages.patch?h=experimental-220
> > 
> > Not enthusiastic about the idea. But the XML magic is mostly
> > Zbigniew's territory (as this long got more complex than my XML-fu can
> > still grasp ;-)).
> 
> Heh; I had a quick look and I'm not sure how/where to define new
> entities. I'll have a closer look when I'm bored (so, maybe in 5 years
> or so :-) ).

Daniel is interested in picking this up.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat