Services that can start by default policy feedback
mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
Thu Feb 24 15:32:43 UTC 2011
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:25:25AM -0500, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> > We considered that option, but it's not just about the desktop install -
> > you need a default set for a default install,
> "Default install"? This is @base from anaconda or something?
Whatever you get if you do an install from something other than the
> > And once you've got a default set for the default install, why not just
> > do it at the package level and ensure some level of consistency?
> Well...until one product wants a "service" enabled and another
> doesn't. I guess in the "whitelist" design the latter just has to
> "chkconfig foo off" in a kickstart. I think this is already the case
> with openssh-server.
Right. I think the reasonable expectation here is that if you (as a
user) don't want the service, don't install the package. If you (as a
SIG) don't want the service but do want the package, blacklist it
> Anyways if we end up with just a documented list that's probably OK.
> But it has tradeoffs - for example, it just says these services *may*
> be enabled, not that they will. So for someone writing a kickstart
> file, you pretty much have to "chkconfig foo on" *anyways*, since you
> have no guarantee that they actually *are* enabled in a specific
> Fedora release.
"May" as in "Are allowed to". It's always going to be the package
maintainers call in the end - we're not going to mandate it.
Matthew Garrett | mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
More information about the devel