[Pkg-systemd-maintainers] Review of http://paste.debian.net/16099/

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 06:26:04PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Am 15.07.2013 18:24, schrieb Michael Biebl:
> > The important thing here is, that tmpfiles does more, then just creating
> > the directory. It e.g. also applies SELinux security labels.
> > Doing that in a centralized ways seems to be vastly superiour then each
> > package doing on its own.
Agreed, but a seperate config file just for a directory for a pidfile
also seems a bit overkill. As an admin, it's not very convinient to
have the config split up between different directories like that.

> And Shawn brought up another important point: the ExecStartPre means one
> additional forked process for each service.
OK, so maybe we should grow a Tmpfiles= stanza, which would
could be used multiple times, and which would carry tmpfiles
snippets to be executed before ExecStartPre.

> Is that really a concern and do you really expect hundreds of empty,
> unused directories for typical installations?  Would seem rather odd
> to me to install hundreds of packages (mostly daemon related) and
> then disable them.
That happens, more on Fedora and other distributions which have
services disabled by default, than on Debian. It's true that one
doesn't look into /run/ too often, but still, having potentially
hundreds of unused directories seems ugly. (Not so much for efficency
reasons, but rather for admin comfort.)

On my fedora box with just a few services, I have 39 directories in /run,
and 22 are empty.

Zbyszek

-- 
they are not broken. they are refucktored
                           -- alxchk