On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 3:26 PM, Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I believe we're missing something fundamental here. If a program/service etc. requires specific hardware to workWell, for rngd, the maintainer actually argued that he does *not* thinkOn Wed, 2018-06-20 at 13:15 -0400, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2018 at 12:34 PM Gerald B. Cox <gbcox@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The proper behavior here would be for these services not to be marked as
> "failed" when the appropriate hardware is not present. When possible, we
> should be using systemd's Condition* features to skip attempting to start
> it at all, but for things where we can't know it ahead of time, we should
> modify the start script to look for appropriate error codes/messages and
> treat the service as "success" if it's skipped because it's not supported
> on the current hardware.
this is the "proper" behaviour. See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1490632#c11 . I don't agree
with him (as you can, er, tell from the subsequent discussion), but it
seemed worth noting it's not a universally agreed truth.
(I don't *think* he'd object to a Condition-type fix, though, if we
could come up with a reliable one).
and it can't gracefully handle situations where that hardware is not present - it shouldn't be a default.
The way to handle this (and other similar situations) is to take away the default status until it can handle
situations where the hardware doesn't exist. This is systems programming 101 - and frankly I am a
bit surprised it's a matter of debate.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/GH3XMTT527D4ZETSFC2VLUTG4AKLESVX/
