[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] skeleton: add systemd network.service unit

[Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>]

On 28/01/14 14:20, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:25:20AM +0100, Maxime Hadjinlian wrote:
>> I would even like to go even further, as I have noticed that a lot of
>> the defined LIBFOO_INSTALL_INIT_SYSTEMD and LIBFOO_INSTALL_INIT_SYSV
>> almost always do the exact same stuff.
>> I would like for the infrastructure to take care of this, if no
>> function is defined, and a .service or S\d{0,2}*, then we should take
>> it and install it.
>>
>> In that case, any particular requirements, the package define a
>> function, other than that, it's taken care of and we avoid duplicate
>> code in all the packages.
>
> Actually, there's two main issues that prevents this in the systemd
> case, and are why we did it that way:
>    - the multi-user-wants thing is actually comparable to the sysvinit
>      runlevels. Some packages might want to set their units to other
>      targets than multi-user (for example, graphical applications are
>      likely to go in the graphical target, not the multi-user one)

  I disagree with this one. Buildroot's defaults should support only a 
single runlevel/target. That's how it's done for sysv init, and I'm very 
happy with it: it's dead easy to see which scripts will be executed at 
startup, you don't have to find out the runlevel etc. With systemd, 
things can become even more complex (because there can be several 
"targets" active at the same time IIRC), and I'd prefer to exclude this 
complexity by default.

  If a user requires several runlevels/targets, than most likely any 
default that buildroot provide will not fit anyway, so the user will have 
to manipulate things in their rootfs overlay or post-build script anyway. 
Therefore, I think it is better for the user if the defaults are simple 
and predictable.


>    - Some units also takes "variables" from the created link names. For
>      example, when you want to run getty, you just have a single getty
>      unit, and the device to run getty on is set in the link name to
>      that unit (so you'd end up with a link in multi-user.target.wants
>      that will be getty.ttyS0.service, linking to
>      /etc/systemd/system/getty.service).

  That is one of the special cases that would be handled in a 
post-install hook. But specifically for the getty case, it's not even 
necessary because we start only a single getty in the default setup, so 
we can directly install it to getty at ttyS0.service .


> At the time, we thought that in the systemd case, the easiest would be
> to simply write down the 2-3 commands we need to setup the unit,
> instead of having to give a whole bunch of variables. And we did the
> same for sysvinit scripts, for consistency.

  I think at the time, we mainly thought that we didn't know yet if the 
installation could be generalized. Now that we have a few packages that 
install unit files, it's more clear that they always to the same.

  Also, as far as I understand, the idea is not to add variables, but 
rather to check for the existence of package/foo/*.service and install that.


  Regards,
  Arnout

>
> Maxime
>


-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F