On Tue, 27.01.15 15:45, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek ([email protected]) wrote:
> Yes, I think attempting any kind of dependency removal *from loaded > units* would be very complicated, and would require major surgery to > current unit engine. And things would become conceptually more complicated, > which we certainly don't need. > > But masking of .wants/ links is something different I think. It is a > *localized* modification to a single configuration file. We currently > allow overridding of almost all configuration (units files, files in > .d directories, recently even generators), but .wants and .requires > are an exception. I think we should allow this. Apart from current > use case, it would things more consistent for the user. Hmm, I am open to allowing to override the symlinks with symlinks, if you follow what I mean. But i'd be careful with allowing to override stuff listed in Wants= in a unit file in /usr, with a symlink in a .wants/ dir in /etc, if you follow what I mean. But yeah, allowing symlinks to override symlinks makes sense, a patch for that would be good. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
