| 1 |
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Thomas D. <whissi@××××××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Also, I cannot belief that I cannot overwrite |
| 3 |
> "/lib/udev/rules.d/80-net-setup-link.rules" via "/etc/udev/rules.d"... |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I don't see why not - from the news item: |
| 6 |
So, to clarify, you can override the new .rules file or the .link file in /etc |
| 7 |
but using the kernel parameter is the most consistent way. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Don't get me wrong. Yes, I don't use systemd and I am a happy OpenRC |
| 10 |
> user but I have no problems with systemd (as long as it doesn't affects |
| 11 |
> me). But this upgrade seems to affect non-systemd users. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
The only thing that changed is the location where a config setting is |
| 15 |
stored. Nobody has to use systemd as a sysvinit replacement. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Wasn't Gentoo about choices? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Well, we generally don't give users a choice in where config files are |
| 20 |
installed. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Now it seems like it is time to give something "back", => make sure a |
| 23 |
> change required for systemd doesn't hurt non-systemd users. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Not really sure how you're defining "hurt" here. Whether you use |
| 26 |
systemd or not udev moved a config file. This sort of thing happens |
| 27 |
on occasion in many packages (one of these days I need to clean out |
| 28 |
/etc/apache2 as I can never remember which files are actually |
| 29 |
sourced). Sure, it is annoying and should be avoided when practical, |
| 30 |
but I don't think it makes sense to deviate from what upstream is |
| 31 |
doing here. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
I haven't looked into the details as to why a config file is stored in |
| 34 |
/lib/systemd, but I imagine that they're trying to store settings in |
| 35 |
one place and have them applied to multiple executables (though |
| 36 |
obviously by overriding the rule you could change this). That isn't a |
| 37 |
bad goal. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Rich |
Archives