[Mageia-dev] [Mageia 2 specifications] Systemd or not systemd

[Eugeni Dodonov]

On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 09:48, Colin Guthrie <mageia at colin.guthr.ie> wrote:

> 'Twas brillig, and Eugeni Dodonov at 12/07/11 13:15 did gyre and gimble:
> > If nobody objects, I could help with that. Mandriva certainly gave a
> > large experience on how to integrate systemd into the system without
> > killing traditional sysvinit alternative.
> >
> > It would also be extremely interested to have native systemd services
> > which use most of systemd features (like sound and alsa scripts, which
> > we discussed with Colin and Andrey Borzenkov some months ago but never
> > got to implement properly).
>
> Massive +1 for systemd and massive +1 Eugeni wanting to help out! \o/
>
> I'll try and help out in bits and bobs too, tho' time is always a problem!
>


Ok, some n00b questions arise from my part, sorry if they seem too basic - I
am only catching up with mga style of development :).

Systemd 30 is out, with lots of nice changes, so I think we should use it
now as we are quite early in the release cycle. It is working on my machine,
but before doing something about it, I prefer to hear opinions :).

Firstly, systemdrequires udev >= 172, what is the policy to update it?
According to 'mgarepo maintdb get udev', it has no maintainers, does anyone
objects if I grab/update it as well?

Secondly, what should be the correct way of supporting systemd in a package?
In Mandriva, I thought on adding a --with flag to enable/disable systemd,
but in most cases it does (almost) nothing. All services which want to
support systemd only need to place their files into /lib/systemd - and
that's it. Should we support opting-out of systemd in specs? I believe
fcrozat is having the same dilemma in SuSE now as well, and he settled on
some common packaging macros.

Almost finally, should the systemd files belong to the main package, the
same way as they do with initscripts-based one (e.g., the package would
provide /lib/systemd/system/%{name}.service together with
%_sysconfig/rc.d/init.d/%{name} for example), with no extra subpackages or
flags - or should all systemd-specific files go into %{name}-systemd package
for example? What do you think?

And finally, what does seems to be the best way of starting to use systemd
in cauldron? I have thought on 3 alternatives:
 - easy way, only having it packaged, but not
providing/obsoleting/conflicting with sysvinit. This way, it will work when
kernel is booted with init=/bin/systemd (the least invasive way)
 - compatible way (like in Mandriva) - it is available, systemd-sysvinit
conflicts with sysvinit, so if someone installs systemd-sysvinit, sysvinit
goes away and systemd is run by default. This seems to be the most sane way
to me (but I could be biased), and it is easiest one for testing
 - ultimate way - systemd provides and obsoletes sysvinit and its goodies.
This way, systemd will be the only one (e.g., highlander style). This is how
fedora did it if I am not mistaken, but I am not sure if it the best way.

So, that's it for now from my part..

Opinions?

-- 
Eugeni Dodonov
http://eugeni.dodonov.net/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </pipermail/mageia-dev/attachments/20110713/27e74b87/attachment.html>