On Mon, 18.07.11 15:34, Tom Lane (tgl@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > Simo Sorce <simo@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 20:57 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > >>>>> http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/on-etc-sysinit.html > > >> No. There is no need for a directory that replaces /etc/sysconfig. It's > >> borked. If a daemon has not configuration file but should have one, then > >> fix the daemon, don't fake a configuration file. > > > Some daemons cannot be "fixed", get over with this mantra that daemons > > need be fixed Lennart. > > Well, if they didn't need fixed before, they'll certainly need fixed > when you make them start keeping their configuration info someplace else > than /etc/sysconfig. This proposal sounds more like "wait, systemd has > not yet broken everything in sight, how can we solve that problem?" > than like something that will actually improve matters for anyone. What does systemd break in this regard? The blog article even explains what you need to do when you really want to continue using a sysconfig file. Also, what phasing out sysconfig gains you is explained in detail in the blog story, and that's all I have to say on this. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
