| 1 |
On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:49:48 -0400 |
| 2 |
Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> |
| 5 |
> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > On 06-08-2012 13:37:55 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: |
| 7 |
> >> > Also, I'm not so sure if this will work correctly for Prefix. |
| 8 |
> >> |
| 9 |
> >> I'm sure that is easily checked and we will get feedback quickly. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > I'm sure systemd/udev will never run in (a) Prefix, so perhaps it is |
| 12 |
> > more sensical not to pseudo-provide support for it. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> I wouldn't be so quick to make that assumption. Right now openrc |
| 16 |
> doesn't work on Prefix but there is a SoC project to change that. Why |
| 17 |
> wouldn't we assume that somebody will do the same for systemd? |
| 18 |
> Obviously the long-term future of systemd/openrc/alternatives is |
| 19 |
> unclear now, but that just seems to be all the more reason to keep our |
| 20 |
> options open. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I'm not suggesting that we fully build-in support for systemd under |
| 23 |
> Prefix and so on, but rather I'm suggesting that if leaving it open as |
| 24 |
> an option now saves us a lot of rework later we should consider it. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> (And yes, I realize that systemd is currently linux-only and why that |
| 27 |
> would make any use under Prefix difficult.) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
There are Linux prefixes too, aren't there? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
I see one use for Prefix systemd unit files currently: when host runs |
| 32 |
systemd, and user uses (symlinks) the Gentoo Prefix init files to start |
| 33 |
prefixed services on the host. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Best regards, |
| 38 |
Michał Górny |
Archives