systemd: Is it wrong?

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 07/10/2011 09:38 PM, Alexander Boström wrote:
> I'm sceptical of Jóhann's FOO="foo=4711" solution. (Nothing to do with
> integers vs. strings, btw, non-set shell variables has always had a
> default value of the empty string.)

It achieves afaict the behavior the maintainer wanted if it was up to me 
I would have done this ( whole nfs )  completly differently....

Dropped

ExecStartPre=/sbin/modprobe -q lockd $LOCKDARG
ExecStartPre=/sbin/sysctl -w $LOCKD_TCPPORT
ExecStartPre=/sbin/sysctl -w $LOCKD_UDPPORT

Completely and having administrators add and to set these values 
manually in /etc/sysctl.conf as I mentioned in comment 30.

Anyway I cant emphasize enough the point to maintainers that do have 
submitted service files to package them and ship them as soon as 
possible we need them out there as early in the development process as 
soon as possible to significantly increase the odds of catching 
potential bugs/issue (like before/after ) during the development cycle 
which in turn should help minimize the unfortunate user experience 
Reindl Harald ( and potentially many others ) went through.

Please follow the packaging guidelines [1][2][3] when packaging and 
shipping the unit files and remember to either drop or subpackage the 
legacy sysv init script and if you don't have the time to package the 
submitted unit file(s) then please make note of that on the bug and I 
see if I cant find a proven packager to assist you in packaging and 
shipping those submitted unit files.

Those unit files may not be perfect but that should be easily fixable 
via update later in the development process and *perfected* once you 
have had/found the time to familiarize your self with systemd.

Thanks

JBG

1.https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines:Systemd
2.https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:ScriptletSnippets#Systemd
3.https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Tmpfiles.d