Re: RFE: make the init manager an image feature (again)

[Enrico Scholz <enrico.scholz@sigma-chemnitz.de>]

Khem Raj <raj.khem-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> writes:

>> > On the specifics of the do_install_append, you've seen my comments about
>> > how we're not learning from past mistakes with the way the do_install in
>> > the class was written. I note Phil also agreed with them, both of us
>> > remembering some of the horrors we've dealt with in the past (and
>> > binconfig.bbclass is still around, sadly).
>> 
>> So you prefer same code to copy same type of files all over the recipes?
>
> duplicating usecase is better even though it may sound copying here
> now think if you add this to a bbclass and works ok for a package
> where we glue the unitfiles fast forward 6mos and the next version of
> the package has added the unitfiles into the package itself since
> systemd is so cool. We will be silently installing our own unit files
> without knowing.

The recent .bbappends with their own do_install_append have this problem
too. But due to the code replication the problem must be fixed at a lot
of different places instead of at a central one.

The .bbclass can do some sanity checks (e.g. making the copy operation
fail when the unit file already exists).


> Worst if the files from package are different. Having individual
> install append gives you an opportunity to this append

I do not see how this is better than removing the local .service from
SRC_URI.



Enrico