I'll give these changes a look, I can never tell what service files
changes are going to do without playing around with them for a bit.
> If I can't figure this out my next suggestion is going to be doing away
> with this service. Once should not ever be in the situation where there
> is no initiator name, since that should be generated when the RPM is
> installed IMHO (which is what we do).
The idea of using a special unit for this came out of issues we had at
Red Hat with generating an initiator name at RPM install time. It
turns out that a lot of systems today aren't installed from RPMs, but
rather users build an image from RPMs and then start up new instances
from that image, especially when virtualized. If image building needs
to remove or replace the initiator name file, it becomes a problem
that deferring to first run time solves.
But if anything I might question the actual value of automatically
generating a random initiator name.
- Chris