On 2013-11-07 08:52, Michael Biebl wrote: > Am 07.11.2013 08:23, schrieb Michael Stapelberg: > That doesn't sound right. No package (besides systemd) should ship > anything in /etc/systemd.
Thanks for clarifying. > Packages which do ship service files, directories or symlinks in > /etc/systemd are to be considered buggy imo. They should be relying on > i-s-h to manage those symlinks and create the corresponding .wants > directories on demand. > > We currently do have a few remaining packages which ship files in > /etc/systemd. Those should be fixed. Is there a lintian check for this? > We could ship /etc/systemd/system in i-s-h, but would that help? That would solve the piuparts issue. i-s-h should ship all directories below /etc/systemd that it might need to use at some point *and* that are also shipped in the systemd package (or any "buggy" package) to make it clear: "this directory is managed by dpkg" (while everything is /var/lib/systemd is solely managed by i-s-h). Andreas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
