| 1 |
On Wed, 8 May 2013 23:26:57 +0800 |
| 2 |
Ben de Groot <yngwin@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 1 May 2013 18:04, Fabio Erculiani <lxnay@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > It looks like there is some consensus on the effort of making systemd |
| 6 |
> > more accessible, while there are problems with submitting bugs about |
| 7 |
> > new systemd units of the sort that maintainers just_dont_answer(tm). |
| 8 |
> > In this case, I am just giving 3 weeks grace period for maintainers to |
| 9 |
> > answer and then I usually go ahead adding units (I'm in systemd@ after |
| 10 |
> > all). |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> In my opinion you should not be asking maintainers to add systemd |
| 13 |
> units to their packages. They most likely do not have systems on which |
| 14 |
> they can test these, and very few users would need them anyway. I |
| 15 |
> would think it is better to add them to a separate systemd-units |
| 16 |
> package. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
How would that package handle unit files differing per package |
| 19 |
versions? For example, changed options, relocated executables... |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Best regards, |
| 23 |
Michał Górny |
Archives