Re: systemd .service file conversion

[Mathieu Parent <math.parent@gmail.com>]

(I'm afraid to feed the troll)

2013/5/30 Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it>:
> On May 30, Gergely Nagy <algernon@balabit.hu> wrote:
>
>> I never quite understood why people seem to think systemd upstream is
>> uncooperative (well, apart from the whole non-linux porting deal, where
>> their stance is completely understandable too). My experience so far
> There is also the "kill features Red Hat does not care about" deal,

Do you have an example?

> and the "invent a new a configuration files scheme because it better
> suits RPM and Red Hat policies" deal.

Do you have an example?

I have a example that show systemd taking non-RH solutions: /etc/hostname [ref]

[ref]: http://0pointer.de/blog/projects/the-new-configuration-files

> Upstream is very cooperative, as long as your needs align with the ones
> of Red Hat.

examples?

Regards
--
Mathieu Parent