nixxy has joined #nixos-systemd
nixxy has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<arianvp> so I have an idea to get rid of our nixos activation script restart systemd logic stuff
<arianvp> and am experimenting with it
<arianvp> so there is Unit.StopWhenUnneeded
<arianvp> and there is Unit.Conflicts
<arianvp> if we add StopWhenUnneeded=true for each nixos managed systemd unit
<arianvp> and then for each generation have a target. e.g.
<arianvp> and has a
<arianvp> then simply starting the new target after activation will stop all units from the previous generation and start the units from the new one I think
<arianvp> ... wait no; because the units from previous and new generation have same names .-. darnit
<arianvp> what if we name all units by their nixstore path? that might work
<aanderse> arianvp: name all units by their store path? and then just alias them as real names?
<aanderse> systemctl status blah is going to have some scary output
<aanderse> heh
<aanderse> well... more scary than it currently is, which brings it on par with how scary all other file names are ;-)
<andi-> NinjaTrappeur: Subject: [systemd-devel] systemd 245 released
<NinjaTrappeur> hairpull
<andi-> I told you so on Monday :P
<NinjaTrappeur> IK
<NinjaTrappeur> I'm 60% through rebasing the patches on 244
<andi-> thats good, then you have a safepoint :0
<NinjaTrappeur> I guess I'll live and breathe for systemd for the next 3 weeks at least :P
<andi-> Yeah, that is typical.
<NinjaTrappeur> flokli did a great job and gathered some comments from a systemd dev about our patches.
<NinjaTrappeur> We should be able to remove some of those
<NinjaTrappeur> *after* we bump it.
<andi-> Yeah, we should do that after :)
<andi-> yeah
<andi-> and before we aren't down to 2-3 trivial patches I would advice against going to patch files...
<andi-> It makes working on rebases so much harder
<andi-> Sure it is possible but it will make it even less attractive
<NinjaTrappeur> I disagree on that. But translating the patches I'm writing back to a git repo is kinda trivial.
<NinjaTrappeur> So yeah, not a big deal from my perspective.
arianvp has joined #nixos-systemd
<flokli> I think referring to our fork makes things less inspectible, and discourages people without write access to nixos/systemd to contribute. Personally, I'd prefer if the nixpkgs expression would be a bunch of patches on top of upstream systemd. This doesn't prevent anybody from massaging these patches inside a git repo, and replaying them on every version bump through git format-patch, though.
<flokli> but that's just my opinion. If there's really a strong veto on that, fine with first getting that count down a bit. But I doubt intermediate work will happen on the nixos/systemd fork either