| 1 |
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 11:06 PM Thomas Deutschmann <whissi@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On 2021-03-22 03:06, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Based on that commit message, it looks systemd switched to looking at |
| 5 |
> > the symlink target instead of /etc/timezone well *after* some major |
| 6 |
> > distro started using a symlink for /etc/localtime. I suspect Kay |
| 7 |
> > Sievers noticed that the content of /etc/timezone and /etc/localtime |
| 8 |
> > were redundant on his development machine, and added a TODO entry to |
| 9 |
> > eliminate the redundant /etc/timezone file. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > In other words, this isn't a case of systemd forcing distros to |
| 12 |
> > symlink /etc/localtime; they were already doing that anyway. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I just downloaded and tested some old distributions: |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Debian 9 was the first Debian release with systemd. Because of systemd, |
| 17 |
> /etc/localtime became a symlink. In Debian 8 or when you install Debian |
| 18 |
> 9 without systemd, it is a regular file. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Ubuntu 12.04.5 is the same: No systemd, /etc/localtime is a regular |
| 21 |
> file. Once they moved to systemd it became a symlink. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> In Fedora 17, which is already using systemd but a version before linked |
| 24 |
> commit, /etc/localtime is also a regular file. But once Fedora upgraded |
| 25 |
> to >=systemd-190 it became a symlink. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Thanks for looking into it. I wonder how Kay's system ended up that |
| 28 |
way then. Just a curiosity. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> That's why from my P.O.V. this is clearly caused by systemd. But does |
| 31 |
> this matter? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
You're the one who brought it up; I'm not sure what the point of that |
| 34 |
was, other than to complain about systemd. |
Archives