On Wed, 14.07.10 17:01, James Antill (james(a)fedoraproject.org) wrote:
On Wed, 2010-07-14 at 22:38 +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 14.07.10 16:03, James Antill (james(a)fedoraproject.org) wrote:
>
> > > > Or you could just parse inittab and notice when runlevel 3 was
listed.
> > > > Keeps everything nice and compatible, including existing manuals and
> > > > books, and sysadmin knowledge.
> > >
> > > Is this really such a biggie? I mean Upstart ignores inittab too, the
> > > only option it still takes into account is this default runlevel and
> > > that only via some shell hackery.
> > >
> > > We go one step further and also ignore that one line.
> >
> > That one line is quite important though. I'm also not sure what you
> > gain by not parsing it.
>
> Well, the way things are designed is that we read compat configuration
> only if no native configuration for this particular item
> exists. Example: we read /etc/init.d/avahi-daemon if
> /lib/systemd/system/avahi-daemon.service does not exist. This is
> followed everywhere else too.
Sure, and for service configuration that seems fine.
> Now, if we translate the same logic to inittab we'd have to check
> /etc/systemd/systemd/default.target first, and if that doesn't exist
> fallback to /etc/inittab.
But your runlevel is not a service configuration, so I see no reason
why you couldn't say "if there is an 'id:blah:' line in inittab
that's
authoritative .... if not, use default".
Well, I want people to use the new thing and have the new logic
auhtoritative. I don't want to keep the old cruft around forever.
Also, where do you suggest I put this message?
Lennart
--
Lennart Poettering - Red Hat, Inc.