Re: Switching the default startup method
Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Bernd Zeimetz wrote:
>> No, decimal numbers are the superior design here as they just work without any
>> magic. One of the reasons I migrated away from SuSE long time ago was the mess
>> called insserv...
>
> There are reports of init script not working because they rely on some
> other (unexpected) initialization done by other scripts, i.e. numbers
> were wrong and could not be easily fixed. And there's nothing magic in the
> dependency based system.
Then get your numbers straight and your system boots again. Trying to debug
problems with insserv is a waste of time when the old sys-rc just worked well.
> How do you get that confidence without testing it on a large scale such as
> unstable? It's not like he did not work on this before-hand. It has been
> tested but there's no way he could have tested all combinations.
When was it uploaded to experimental?
When was there a call to test the new things while they're in experimental?
This is NOT the way really important parts of Debian should be maintained.
>> Debian's had multiple choices for init scripts for a long time (file-rc
>> vs sysv-rc). I don't think there's any good reason to throw that out the
>> window.
>
> I'm not asking for that. Neither does Petter:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=538959#54
He is not asking to remove file-rc, but to modify it to use dependency based
booting, which is an absolute no-go. File-rc is slim and fast and works very
very well, I can't see a reason why one should change that.
> [....]
> I would like to mention the fact that the new file-rc maintainer is not
> really cooperative either (thus not improving the situation for its
> users). It would be nice if Alexander pointed out why he doesn't want to
> fix 539609, his angry reply in
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=539591#15 doesn't bring
> the discussion forward while Petter tried to lay the path to allow file-rc
> to be a working alternative again.
Please read the mail from Alexander again. There is *NO* need to change it, as
long as Debian does not enforce dependency-based boot via policy. Insserv is
clearly not the way to go imho, maybe upstart one day, who knows.
>> (In other words, not all Debian systems are alike. That Debian allows
>> the variaty and we don't say "uh, but all people use
>> (gnome|kde|whatever), this is not supported" is one of our (almost
>> unique) selling points. For what reason should we do it different this
>> time, especially without being forced?)
>
> You can request choice, but the choice should not come at the expense
> of not improving our default boot system.
Not a problem here, just get those bugs in insserv fixed. Removing file-rc and
migrating back to sys-rc is not a problem also, why should this not be possible
for sys-rc with insserv? Or why does one not give users the choise to use
dependency-based boot or not? Why are such changes forced without getting
consensus first?
> It think Petter communicated largely on his goal for quite a long time.
> It's been a release goal for Lenny already. He organized a BoF at debconf
> too.
There are a lot of talks and bofs at debconfs. A lot of them don't result in a
change in Debian soon.
> Very similar to the dash RG except that he did not say on -devel that he
> will do it soon.
Which is exactly the problem.
Announcing such changes, asking people to test things, that's the right way.
--
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79
ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
Reply to: