On Friday 04 of July 2014 00:09:03 Lennart Poettering wrote: > On Mon, 23.06.14 16:23, Pavel Raiskup (praiskup@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: > > $ cat /etc/postgresql/postgresql@com_example > > PGDATA=/some/path/pg/com_example > > PGPORT=@SOMEPORT@ > > $ systemctl start postgresql@com_example > > > > Would you see something bad on that approach (please, take into > > account that we would not stop supporting the old way, we just want to > > make future configuration easier and straight-forward). > > Unit files are configuration files. Kind of - but not so "pure" configuration files because we can not mark them %config based on packaging guildelines. > It's OK to copy unit files from > /usr/lib/systemd/system into /etc/systemd/system and edit it there. Copying does not work for us (copied service file is no longer packager's responsibility - which may seem like a benefit but it is at the expense of admin's comfort). Drop-in feature would be OK from this POV (.. but see below the downsides.. ). > I'd always advise against inventing addition configuration files that > are neither the daemons own, nor systemd's. I hope we can call this as a systemd's configuration, or no? It sounds like EnvironmentFile is also starting to be deprecated, is it so? The first neat benefit about this is that the configuration file may be sourced by any shell script. The second benefit is that user doesn't need to bother with so long directory names: $ cat /etc/systemd/system/postgresql@com.example.d/redef_sth.conf [service] Environ=PGDATA=_Pathname_without_spaces_ --- Little off-topic, but imo worth saying. What I think we miss in systemd in this regard is (because there are some convenience scripts trying to automatize usual admin's tasks - and these are dependant on systemd's configuration): * Automatic way of exporting service's environment. Something like: $ systemctl environment postgresql.service PGDATA=/path/to/a/data/dir PGPORT=5433 The 'systemctl show -p Environment' does not work for us, because it does not expand contents of EnvironmentFile :(. Also white-space problems .. * I feel that you try to "standardize" the place where services are configured. What about to have some "standard" location with files in EnvironementFile= format. Could we then mark those as %config in spec file? Pavel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct