Thank you for the useful explanations in your message! On Sun, Mar 06, 2016 at 02:51:34PM -0300, Felipe Sateler wrote: > > I meant the logic to determine if setupcon or the cached scripts should be > run. If in the future that part is changed (eg, the names are changed, or > more scripts are generated), there is no guarantee the change will reach > users, since they may have modified the init script.
I see... Yes, you are correct about this. > However, this is not exactly the same: if the cached script fails, then > setupcon would not be run. I was just pondering on the different options I had. One of them was to change the cached script so that it runs setupcon when necessary. > Also, I would advise against having different logic in the systemd services > than in the init scripts: the maintenance burden is higher, and requires a > higher initial understanding from people not already familiar with the > package. I agree in 100% with this. Anton Zinoviev
