1 |
On Sat, 25 May 2013 15:53:21 -0400 |
2 |
"Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> We are moving too quickly on bug #448882 ([Tracker] packages not |
5 |
> providing systemd units). We should come to better consensus on systemd |
6 |
> integration and we were getting there with the idea of INSTALL_MASK. I |
7 |
> don't know that it is a working solution yet. I have to oppose adding |
8 |
> unit files unless we have a way to opt out for reasons I gave earlier, |
9 |
> regarding embedded systems where one needs to conserve space |
10 |
> aggressively. And we may have found a way to do so without cluttering |
11 |
> ebuilds with USE flags. |
12 |
|
13 |
<snarky> |
14 |
|
15 |
You could drop conf.d and init.d files to save space, unit files are |
16 |
obviously smaller. |
17 |
|
18 |
</snarky> |
19 |
|
20 |
> Can I ask the systemd people to design a working solution for opting |
21 |
> out? I can't support this initiative without such a solution and I |
22 |
> would be happy to work with the systemd people to reach it, ie I'll test. |
23 |
|
24 |
INSTALL_MASK *is* a working solution. And I've designed |
25 |
app-portage/install-mask which sets it up for you. |
26 |
|
27 |
If you want something better, just integrate 'keywords' (like |
28 |
'systemd', 'doc', 'man') into INSTALL_MASK, and be done with it. Just |
29 |
make sure to store the list of recognized keywords in the repo rather |
30 |
than keeping it rotting inside portage code. |
31 |
|
32 |
-- |
33 |
Best regards, |
34 |
Michał Górny |