| 1 |
On Sun, Nov 29, 2020 at 4:50 PM William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2020 at 07:55:33AM +0100, Piotr Karbowski wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Hi, |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > On 25/11/2020 22.57, Georgy Yakovlev wrote: |
| 7 |
> > > systemd-tmpfiles does not depend on any systemd-isms, does not need dbus, |
| 8 |
> > > and is just a drop-in replacement, the only step needed is to emerge the |
| 9 |
> > > package. |
| 10 |
> > > it's a simple single binary + manpage, binary links to libacl and couple other |
| 11 |
> > > system libs. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Can confirm that systemd-tmpfiles works fine on OpenRC systems. Been |
| 14 |
> > using it since end of October. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > Two things that are different in terms of interface to opentmpfiles is |
| 17 |
> > that systemd-tmpfiles does not have --dry-run runtime option, and it |
| 18 |
> > will complain if any /usr/lib/tmpfiles.d/*.conf uses /var/run instead of |
| 19 |
> > /run, but that's just an warning. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Also, have we tested this on musl systems? |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> My plan is to take the tmpfiles code from systemd, like eudev and elogin |
| 24 |
> have done, and rewrite it to not use the systemd libraries so it will be |
| 25 |
> more portable. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I think this is a bigger task than you realize. Even if you manage to |
| 28 |
get an initial rewrite done, you would also need to keep up with |
| 29 |
feature updates systemd releases. That hasn't worked out for eudev, |
| 30 |
and I doubt it would work out for this yet-to-exist tmpfiles project. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Maintaining a patchset against the systemd sources is probably the |
| 33 |
best path forward on this. |
Archives