On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 08:59:11AM +0200, Samuel Stirtzel wrote: > 2013/4/3 Burton, Ross <ross.bur...@intel.com>: > > On 3 April 2013 15:51, Samuel Stirtzel <s.stirt...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> When we decide that we handle standard behavior different than the > >> rest of the world, then this patch is basically a fork of systemd. > >> Also we tell every affected software developer: > >> "No your software won't work with OE-core / Yocto Project without > >> adaption, we are incompatible with the systemd standard to make life > >> more comfortable for (some of) us" > > > > Changing the default target depending on the use of the image isn't > > really the same as forking systemd, and we're not making anything > > incompatible. > > Please read above what I wrote to Richard. > > > > >>> How would you implement this? Register the alternative in systemd.bb > >>> defaulting to graphical, and then switch it in every image recipe in > >>> oe-core/meta-oe/etc that doesn't use an X or Wayland (patches coming > >>> shortly) session? > >> > >> If this works why not? > >> It sounds like a good idea, because this way would not break anything, > >> and we would be compatible with the standard systemd. > > > > Obviously the nuances of my sentiment were lost as it was transcribed to > > ASCII. > > > > I'm advocating changing the default target to multi-user and then > > patching the two recipes where X session scripts are packaged to also > > set the target to graphical. People switching to systemd who don't > > use the standard X sessions (they roll their own, or don't use X, or > > whatever) will notice quickly that the default target needs to be > > changed, and can do it in their graphical startup recipes. > > > > You're suggesting leaving the default target as graphical and changing > > uncountable numbers of *image recipes* to override the default target, > > the alternative being errors in the log. > > Image inheritance will hopefully reduce the number of required changes. > > > > > So far "the community" disagrees on the approach here - we've had > > vocal objections to errors in the log for any image, changing the > > default target, and the other proposals. > > The seen error is a warning IIRC. > Breaking something to fix a warning somewhere else seems like a bold move. > Being incompatible with systemd standards to archive this seems to be > a very odd compromise. > > > > > We *do* need a way of changing the default target. Do we at least all > > agree that update-alternatives is a logical way of changing it on a > > per-image basis? > > Yes it is required to have the possibility to change the target where needed. > I guess update-alternatives will do the job.
I agree that old implementation of this was really ugly: http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.handhelds.openembedded.core/32492 But patchset which consistently updates all related recipes to use u-a for default-target looks OK to me (I don't see better alternative). -- Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: martin.ja...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
