On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 6:39 AM, Thomas D. <whi...@whissi.de> wrote: > Also, I cannot belief that I cannot overwrite > "/lib/udev/rules.d/80-net-setup-link.rules" via "/etc/udev/rules.d"...
I don't see why not - from the news item: So, to clarify, you can override the new .rules file or the .link file in /etc but using the kernel parameter is the most consistent way. > Don't get me wrong. Yes, I don't use systemd and I am a happy OpenRC > user but I have no problems with systemd (as long as it doesn't affects > me). But this upgrade seems to affect non-systemd users. > The only thing that changed is the location where a config setting is stored. Nobody has to use systemd as a sysvinit replacement. > Wasn't Gentoo about choices? Well, we generally don't give users a choice in where config files are installed. > Now it seems like it is time to give something "back", => make sure a > change required for systemd doesn't hurt non-systemd users. Not really sure how you're defining "hurt" here. Whether you use systemd or not udev moved a config file. This sort of thing happens on occasion in many packages (one of these days I need to clean out /etc/apache2 as I can never remember which files are actually sourced). Sure, it is annoying and should be avoided when practical, but I don't think it makes sense to deviate from what upstream is doing here. I haven't looked into the details as to why a config file is stored in /lib/systemd, but I imagine that they're trying to store settings in one place and have them applied to multiple executables (though obviously by overriding the rule you could change this). That isn't a bad goal. Rich
