state of systemd in Fedora and services pledge

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at
Wed Feb 23 17:39:55 UTC 2011

On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 04:38:50PM +0100, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> 2011/2/23 Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger at>:
> > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 01:30:52AM +0100, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> >> On Tue, 22.02.11 12:19, Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger at wrote:
> >>
> >> > 2011/2/22 Michał Piotrowski <mkkp4x4 at>:
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > I wonder what is the actual state of Fedora systemd integration? I
> >> > > hope that there is more systemd native services than listed on
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Currently I have quite a lot of work, but I make a systemd services
> >> > > pledge - I'll write three services per week if 10 other people do the
> >> > > same
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > uh... How are you creating the spec file?  In testing, I've yet to get
> >> > a specfile that performs as expected.  I'd be happy if you could take
> >> > a look at the proposed guidelines and figure out if this is a
> >> > guidelines bug, a systemd bug, a testing bug, or a bug in the packages
> >> > that I'm testing with.
> >>
> >> Did you actually check if you had at least chkconfig 1.3.50-1 installed
> >> when you tested this, as I wrote in the FPC bug?
> >>
> >> Also, Michał's work is about adding systemd unit files, not about adding
> >> SysV init scripts, because those already exist...
> >>
> > Okay, I've tried all sorts of different wording to get you to understand
> > what is being tested.  I'll try one more before giving up:
> >
> > Are you proposing that system V init scripts be banned for F15 and that we
> > do not allow upgrades from F14 to F15, only new installs?
> >
> > If you aren't proposing that, then testing that we can successfully upgrade
> > from a systemVinit script using package to a systemd unit file using package
> > is a test that needs to pass.
> I'm not a Fedora developer and I do not know much about RPM's. Could you
> write something more about what problem you mean?
If a particular piece of software is going to convert from systemv init
scripts to systemd unit files we'll end up with two important rpm files.
One that is before the conversion and has sysv init scripts and one that is
after the conversion and has systemd unit files.

The rpm packages contain small (usually shell) scripts that allow the
package to register themselves with the init system.  These will turn
the service on if that's allowed by policy, restart the service if it's
already running, stop the service before uninstallation, etc.

The proposed Packaging Guidelines for systemd:

Needs to contain the necessary scriptlets for packages that use systemd unit
files.  At the moment, the draft only contains scriptlets for a default-off
case.  We also need scriptlets for services which autostart and for services
which bus activate.  Given that FESCo seems to be moving towards a policy
that allows a broad range of services to autostart, we probably need the
autostart guidelines in place soon.  The bus activated scriptlets are needed
but we may be able to delay as it sounds like we only want a few services to
be bus activated anyway and those services can be started as normal until we
have guidelines on how they need to be set to autostart.

The scriptlets that we currently have do not work in testing.  I have tested
the migration path from a sysv init script using service to an upgraded
package using systemd unit files and that doesn't work.  at some point
someone also needs to test the upgrade between systemd unit file using
services but I personally haven't had time for that yet.  The FPC ticket has
the steps that would constitute a good test of those services.

Without guidelines that work, current work to port to systemd unit files
could have several undesirable effects.  Least critically would be that the
ported packages would need to be revisited to have their spec files updated.
Most critically, the unit file using packages would break end users systems
when they upgrade the package from F15 to F14.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : 

More information about the devel mailing list