On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 10:46:21AM -0500, Tom Callaway wrote: > Many thanks to Lennart for writing the initial text for the systemd > guidelines. I've taken his draft and reworked it a bit so that it > matches the flow and style of the existing guidelines: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/Systemd_Revised_Draft > > Keep in mind that %{_unitdir} is undefined at the moment, we would add > it to redhat-rpm-config before this draft becomes a guideline. > > Please look it over and give any feedback. > Okay -- one thing is whether we want to specifiy that services either install unit files or systemvinit files but not both (in the same package. A subpackage for the alternate init system would be fine.) The idea being that there's several ways that having the sysvinit can confuse sysadmins. Off the top of my head I can think of: 1) A system admin unfamiliar with systemd installs apache and sees that there's an /etc/init.d/httpd file. He runs /etc/init.d/httpd start to startup the service unaware that when systemd reboots the service it will be using the unit file and not the sysvinit script. 2) A system admin unfamiliar with systemd sees that there's an /etc/init.d/httpd file. He customizes the file for his environment but then is confused why his customizations aren't being used when the system reboots (and systemd starts httpd using the unit file). SysVinit scripts could still be installed as documentation or via a subpackage for system admins that want to run an alternate init system. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgp1NSC3tl5og.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
