Services that can start by default policy feedback

"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" johannbg at
Mon Feb 28 21:46:36 UTC 2011

On 02/27/2011 07:33 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2011 12:23:59 +0000
> "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"<johannbg at>  wrote:
>> Is it possible to get the rationality behind why those services which
>> are permitted to be enabled by default as specific exceptions are
>> granted that exception.
> Well, I think the rationale was "these are basic services that are
> required to bring the machine up into a gui and allow a user to login
> and be able to apply updates, etc"

We should not standardize our policy around "Desktop Installs" our 
community is broader then any ( single ) *DE

> At least that was my thought.
> I wonder now if we couldn't use the critical path setup to define
> these.
> Ie, "If your package is not critical path, it should not start by
> default. If it is, it _may_ start by default"

Interesting approach but I agree whole heartedly with Colin Walters take 
on this..

"Honestly I think it'd be conceptually a lot simpler if all services
didn't start on RPM installation, period.  Specific ones that we want
enabled by default in a desktop install could simply be turned on in
the kickstart file."


More information about the devel mailing list