On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 8:19 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek <zbys...@in.waw.pl> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 18, 2014 at 07:09:34PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> >> On 12/18/2014 06:44 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: >> > >> >On 12/18/2014 06:36 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: >> >>You missed the part where I said "you should make it opt-in". >> > >> >Should we not first determine the practicality of implementing >> >this and if the system service manager should actually be looking >> >up this info to begin with? >> > >> >We could not add the ability to define the upstream homepage in >> >the status output but we can now clutter the status output with a >> >name of a package? >> >> This could be implemented without the overhead and conflict as an >> extension to the output listed with "systemctl list-unit-files" if >> opt-in > That's a valid point. list-unit-files seems to be a better home > for this.
The systemd command line tools are not supposed to call into higher-level daemons to query data. This sounds like the wrong way around. It sound like someone should teach packagekit about systemd units. Also, systmed does not want to get involved into any concept of "packages". It is what distributions are made of, but this is not systemd's task to manage of describe. Please do not merge anything like this. Thanks, Kay _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
