On Sat, 01.03.14 21:01, Colin Walters (walt...@verbum.org) wrote: > On Sat, Mar 1, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Colin Walters <walt...@verbum.org> > wrote: > > > >RuntimeDirectory=/run/mydaemon > >PersistentStateDirectory=/var/lib/mydaemon > > > Btw, see also this thread: > > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/server/2014-February/000843.html > > Putting these together (and how about we just go ahead and mandate > /run and /var/lib), we could have something like: > > RuntimeDirectory=yes > > That would auto-instantiate /run/$SYSTEMD_UNIT_NAME.
Would $SYSTEMD_UNIT_NAME according to your suggestion map to %n or to %p or to %i, followign systemd's specifier notation? (see systemd.unit(5)). > Notably, this would help administrators move away from the package > being the central naming unit and more towards systemd being the > basis for names. > > (It is confusing that one has to deal with package names, systemd > unit names, and process names, which can all be the same, closely > related, or wildly different) So far we stayed out of the business of being normative on how to name things. Which I figure is something we can get away with as long as we focus on building an OS. I wonder though whether unit files like this would be the right place to start enforcing naming rules for 3rd party apps... Lennart -- Lennart Poettering, Red Hat _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel