[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: init system discussion status

Clint Adams <clint@debian.org> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 10:02:01AM -0800, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> As said elsewhere, I think there should be a paragraph about packages
>> that depend on a specific init system for reasons other than service
>> startup, e.g.
>> 4. The above criterium also extends to dependencies that are not related
>>    to service startup. In jessie, no package may depend on a single
>>    initsystem other than sysvinit. After jessie, no package may depend
>>    on a single init system other than the default init.
>> or alternatively   
>> 4. Packages may, however, depend on a specific init system (which may
>>    not be the default init) for features that are not related to daemon
>>    startup. Such packages will only be installable on systems running a
>>    non-default init, but are permitted in the archive.
> As loath as I am to participate in this discussion, I have to ask
> if your intent is to suddenly outlaw all the packages which depend
> on runit.

Are you asking me personally? No, that's not my intent. I merely think
that a CTTE solution should spell out precisely to what extent a package
must be compatible with the default init (i.e., if it must be fully
working with the default init, or if it only has to provide daemon
startup/supervision/shutdown for the default init). This is why I
explicitly listed two conflicting, alternative wordings.


Encrypted emails preferred.
PGP fingerprint: 5B93 61F8 4EA2 E279 ABF6  02CF A9AD B7F8 AE4E 425C

             »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.«

Reply to: