<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 08/21/2012 05:08 PM, Lennart
Poettering wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:20120821170835.GA2811@tango.0pointer.de"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Tue, 21.08.12 16:52, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" (<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:johannbg@gmail.com">johannbg@gmail.com</a>) wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>On 08/21/2012 02:52 PM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> ></span>However, the person who is sending these bugs reports is
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> ></span>(a) in a much better position to change the packages because they
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> ></span>understand the problem and the solution, and (b) ought to take on this
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> ></span>work because that's part of whatever feature/cleanup/etc they are
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> ></span>proposing, instead of pushing part of that work off to everyone else.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>That's how I <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>initially<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> though the feature process worked as in the
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>feature owner always has to do all the work.
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>Then again I suspect not many maintainers will do this change since
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>if I'm not mistaken it a) means they have to have separated spec
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>files for <F18 and b) will break everybody's upgrade path since if
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>I'm not mistaken preset <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>resets<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> units enable/disablement <b class="moz-txt-star"><span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span>again<span class="moz-txt-tag">*</span></b> (
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>it happens when the legacy sysv to systemd migration takes place
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>)...
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">No, presets don't reset existing enablement/disablement status.
Presets only matter with the initial installation of a package and when
a package is converted from sysv to systemd, but do not matter if a
package already uses systemd unit files, or just converts non-macro
scriptlets to macro scriptlets.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
But it's still necessary to keep two separate spec files ( <F18
& F18> ) + given the time of the packaging guideline changes
and the branching happening the *day after* I tempted to put on my
QA hat and argue this should only apply to F19 not F18 and from the
looks of it the Red Hat's systemd *Team* is behind this which
constitutes of what 5 - 10 people now so there should be sufficient
manpower for those that requested this to actually make those
changes themselves before F19 get's released... <br>
<br>
JBG<br>
</body>
</html>