Created attachment 358856 [details] prosody.service-r1 Please add systemd unit. Old unit works well with prosody-0.9, but this one is better.
Created attachment 358858 [details, diff] prosody-0.9.1-r1.ebuild.patch tmpfiles.d config is not needed anymore.
Created attachment 358860 [details, diff] prosody.service.diff diff between old and new units
(The package already includes systemd unit files, it shouldn't block the bug for adding them then)
(In reply to Pacho Ramos from comment #3) > (The package already includes systemd unit files, it shouldn't block the bug > for adding them then) Actually systemd support was removed from prosody-0.9*
Created attachment 369054 [details] prosody.tmpfilesd Default prosody.cfg.lua has been changed in prosody-0.9.2: - "pidfile" option was added, that's why tmpfiles.d config is needed. prosody fails to start if it can't write PID file - "daemonize = true" option causes warnings in log: Jan 29 16:23:53 mod_posix error Failed to daemonize: already-daemonized I'm not sure what to do with the last issue. Two options here: 1. use old systemd unit with Type=forking and prosodyctl 2. leave it up to the users to ignore warnings or to change "daemonize" option in config.
Created attachment 369056 [details, diff] prosody-0.9.2.ebuild.patch
(In reply to Alexander Tsoy from comment #4) > Actually systemd support was removed from prosody-0.9* Yeah, if it got dropped we should block the tracker again.
That "daemonize = true" was added on purpose in our patch to make it fit the openrc init.d script... maybe we could add a systemd USE flag to provide a different config that fits better systemd unit file and let us drop the pid handling... or use the old unit file. @systemd team, what do you prefer? (I personally like much more to avoid "forking", but that is only my opinion)
Looks like the bug was fixed. Please close it...
