3 ms·

Again, not defending systemd, but if you have a structured header in your file which is following a standard (even if no one is using your header or that standa

Again, not defending systemd, but if you have a structured header in your file which is following a standard (even if no one is using your header or that standard yet), and your header is wrong, is it really anyone else's fault but yours? Shouldn't the fix simply be to remove the header (if you don't want anyone using it) or fixing it (if you do)? Why ask tools, which interpret the header according to the standard, to do something different because your header is wrong?

digi_owl 10y ago
And once more we are myopically focusing on the technical when the root of the issue is historical and social (if not organizational). While the headers have existed, they have historically been underutilized and thus poorly maintained. Thus a newcomer can't just walk in and suddenly make them massively important while claiming the breakages that come out of it is not their problem.
- jjnoakes 10y ago
  > While the headers have existed, they have historically been underutilized and thus poorly maintained. They are human-readable, so even if no tool used them, they still have an effect. Someone might read the header and incorrectly move the service in their sequential boot order, for example. Would you recommend that the person reading the header also "fix themselves" instead of fixing the header or filing a bug against whomever owns the incorrect file? > Thus a newcomer can't just walk in and suddenly make them massively important while claiming the breakages that come out of it is not their problem. Someone decided to put the two things together, right? Someone combined this "newcomer" and these old files with the bad headers? The onus should be on that person to make things right, not the tool which is using the headers correctly. It could be a distribution, for example, but it isn't the tool. Update them or remove them if they are wrong. Why campaign to leave them intact and incorrect?

digi_owl 10y ago

And once more we are myopically focusing on the technical when the root of the issue is historical and social (if not organizational). While the headers have existed, they have historically been underutilized and thus poorly maintained. Thus a newcomer can't just walk in and suddenly make them massively important while claiming the breakages that come out of it is not their problem.

jjnoakes 10y ago
> While the headers have existed, they have historically been underutilized and thus poorly maintained. They are human-readable, so even if no tool used them, they still have an effect. Someone might read the header and incorrectly move the service in their sequential boot order, for example. Would you recommend that the person reading the header also "fix themselves" instead of fixing the header or filing a bug against whomever owns the incorrect file? > Thus a newcomer can't just walk in and suddenly make them massively important while claiming the breakages that come out of it is not their problem. Someone decided to put the two things together, right? Someone combined this "newcomer" and these old files with the bad headers? The onus should be on that person to make things right, not the tool which is using the headers correctly. It could be a distribution, for example, but it isn't the tool. Update them or remove them if they are wrong. Why campaign to leave them intact and incorrect?