[Mageia-dev] [Mageia 2 specifications] Systemd or not systemd

[Michael Scherer]

Le mercredi 13 juillet 2011 à 22:47 -0300, Eugeni Dodonov a écrit :

> Almost finally, should the systemd files belong to the main package, the
> same way as they do with initscripts-based one (e.g., the package would
> provide /lib/systemd/system/%{name}.service together with
> %_sysconfig/rc.d/init.d/%{name} for example), with no extra subpackages or
> flags - or should all systemd-specific files go into %{name}-systemd package
> for example? What do you think?

Everything in 1 package.

> And finally, what does seems to be the best way of starting to use systemd
> in cauldron? I have thought on 3 alternatives:
>  - easy way, only having it packaged, but not
> providing/obsoleting/conflicting with sysvinit. This way, it will work when
> kernel is booted with init=/bin/systemd (the least invasive way)
>  - compatible way (like in Mandriva) - it is available, systemd-sysvinit
> conflicts with sysvinit, so if someone installs systemd-sysvinit, sysvinit
> goes away and systemd is run by default. This seems to be the most sane way
> to me (but I could be biased), and it is easiest one for testing
>  - ultimate way - systemd provides and obsoletes sysvinit and its goodies.
> This way, systemd will be the only one (e.g., highlander style). This is how
> fedora did it if I am not mistaken, but I am not sure if it the best way.

Option 2 for Mageia 2, and option 3 for Mageia 3.

People on Fedora list were quite reluctant to changes ( to say the least
), and I am pretty sure that someone will hit a unrelated corner case in
the last minute. Rtp was not really fond of systemd on arm and embedded
system either.

So we should keep the possibility of letting people choose for Mageia 2.

Also, systemd was reverted for f14, and while it was working fine for
me, I would rather make sure we have a reputation of being cautious and
choosing the quality rather than trying to steal the reputation of
Fedora. 

-- 
Michael Scherer