Le vendredi 21 septembre 2012 à 13:42 +0200, Jos Poortvliet a écrit :

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 16:16:36 Frederic Crozat wrote:

...

Le jeudi 20 septembre 2012 à 10:11 -0500, Larry Finger a écrit :

...

On 09/20/2012 07:20 AM, Frederic Crozat wrote:

...

Le lundi 03 septembre 2012 à 19:13 -0500, Larry Finger a écrit :

...

On 09/03/2012 10:21 AM, Dominique Leuenberger a.k.a DimStar wrote:

...

Hi all,

I know, a radical proposal, BUT a bunch of reported issues in 12.2 are around systemd/sysinitV, both trying to do the same thing, differently.

It would clearly help the distribution to commit clearly to ONE init system only, officially and formally ditching the other.

This allows for proper testing of ONE Init System and fixing issues around it. Not having to worry for an alternative INIT System can only have it's advantages.

(Not saying NOBODY can keep on working / integrating SysInitV, just saying: the openSUSE Project should focus on SystemD as the one supported Init System).

There are a bunch of issues we could have saved ourselves from by not going the split way.

One defect in the 12.1 and 12.2 implementations is that after.local is ignored. There is an easy fix given by James McDaniel in his blog at http://forums.opensuse.org/blogs/comments/comment549.html. This file should be a part of any update of systemd.

after.local wasn't implemented initially because I wasn't aware of this "suse-ism" when I ensured systemd was usable on openSUSE for 12.1.

The other big issue with after.local is relying on $ALL virtual target which is was not possible to implement easily with a dynamic service manager, like systemd (unlike insserv which is computing static dependencies before booting). Fortunately, systemd 185 (ie not the one in 12.2 but for next openSUSE release) have a new service type, called "idle", which will be used for getty (so tty will be started only after all services had chances to write their status report) and probably for halt.local.

For systemd in 12.1 or 12.2, we can't add support for after.local reliably (and I would advise people to try to write more .service files instead, adding After=... to ensure action is started at the right moment).

Frederic,

Welcome back. I hope that your inbox did not undo the therapeutic benefits of your holiday.

Your advice for writing more .service files is obviously correct; however, that may be too steep a learning curve for many users. For most of them, the file in the link I posted earlier does what they need, and we now know that the next version of openSUSE will have a systemd that will allow something that is akin to after.local on SystemV.

Well, I re-read the after-local.service file from forum and chances are very high it won't do what people are expecting: it will indeed start /etc/init.d/after.local but it will be started at any time during the boot and not after all other services are started (which is what people are expected)..

That's really something to find a solution for, then. Adding simple things to this script is something 'normal' users can do and figure out (and they do). Increasing the barrier to such things is imho bad - we've got quite a number of users, I bet, who are on this level of proficiency with openSUSE: able to add or remove a line to/from a shell script but not write stuff themselves. I admittedly fall (mostly) in that category myself.

As I explained in another reply in this huge thread, we should be able to handle after.local properly for 12.3 but for 12.2 (or to call after.local will probably not do what people are expecting.. -- Frederic Crozat <fcrozat@suse.com> SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org