You can always edit the service directly. There's nothing stopping you from doing that, and most people probably do it this way. Doing that would make it just like any other application with a config file.

BUT have you ever had configs overwritten by an update? Have you ever found an update to break your config? These are really quite annoying problems to deal with. Having the override file basically means you can keep the maintainer's config as your "gold standard" and then edit it without worrying of fucking things up.

This is the difference to me:

  systemctl edit:
    It is clearly defined what you changed. Your changes will not be overwritten by an update.

  directly editing config:
    File may change with update. You won't be notified of said change. If you didn't write down what you're changes were, you need to redo that work and figure it out all over again.

The pros outweigh the cons IMO. I had to get myself into the habit of doing `systemctl edit foo` instead of `sudo vim /etc/systemd/system/foo.service`, but that's provided more benefits than the annoyance of building this habit.

▲ wtallis 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I think you missed the point entirely. I'm not complaining at all that there's a way to make override files. I'm pointing out that the need for making override files (even with the affordance of a special command to handle editing them) is itself a symptom of a bad system design and a deeper problem that deserves a broader solution than what systemd offers.

I run gentoo on most of my linux machines. I don't have a problem with files in /etc being silently overwritten by the package manager. Gentoo's solution isn't perfect, but at least it gets at the heart of the real problem.

I think perhaps systemd should use its clout to demand a sane solution to this problem, instead of just developing their own workaround that requires users to learn another unnecessary custom way to edit a plain text file.

▲ godelski 19 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

  > I'm not complaining at all that there's a way to make override files. 
  > I'm pointing out that the need for making override files

  >> You can always edit the service directly. There's nothing stopping you from doing that, and most people probably do it this way.

I'm lost. You're complaining that you'd be happy if you could do the thing I said you could do in my opening sentence as well as my closing? Sorry, but I think it is you who have

  > I think you missed the point entirely.

▲ ac29 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> just developing their own workaround that requires users to learn another unnecessary custom way to edit a plain text file.

There's no need to use systemctl edit to make or edit an override file, its just a convenience shortcut

▲

wtallis an hour ago | parent [-]

> There's no need to use systemctl edit to make or edit an override file, its just a convenience shortcut

Do you think anyone who's reached this point in the thread has missed out on that? Yes, obviously those steps can be done manually. But that's not what's being recommended here, and it's more steps to learn and remember, and it doesn't really matter whether accomplishing this task requires one extra command or several when it either shouldn't need to be done at all, or should work the same for any config file that needs to be protected, not just systemd service definitions.

It's almost like one of the systemd developers looked at visudo and forgot that sudo should probably never be used as an example of the right way to do things.

	▲	godelski 13 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Are you okay dude? I'm serious. This is obviously not about systemd, so what's up?