| 1 |
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:38 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2017 at 09:06:53PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Fix the eclass code to remove the misguided Linux conditionals. |
| 4 |
>> The whole purpose of the eclass was to avoid having to implement |
| 5 |
>> fallback logic for systems not having service manager tmpfiles.d |
| 6 |
>> support. Making it conditional to Linux implied that for non-Linux |
| 7 |
>> systems (Prefix, FreeBSD) we would have to implement explicit fallback |
| 8 |
>> to create the necessary directories. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> While systemd (and therefore systemd-tmpfilesd) is indeed |
| 11 |
>> Linux-specific, the opentmpfiles implementation should be pretty |
| 12 |
>> portable and there is no reason to restrict it to Linux only, or to |
| 13 |
>> prevent using it on non-Linux OpenRC (and non-OpenRC) systems. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Opentmpfiles can run right now on non-openrc systems, but it requires a |
| 16 |
> linux host; that is why the Linux conditionals are there. We currently support |
| 17 |
> selinux and even more specific linux code is coming with the btrfs |
| 18 |
> subvolume support. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
My Linux system does not support selinux. Other people have Linux |
| 21 |
systems which do not support btrfs. tmpfiles still works on such |
| 22 |
systems. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
What exactly breaks on non-Linux systems? |
Archives