Bug#727708: init system discussion status

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

(Josh, is there some reason why you replied to the TC list directly
rather than the bug report ?  You should send your messages to the bug
so they are filed, displayed and archived there.  Thanks.)

Josh Triplett writes ("Re: Bug#727708: init system discussion status"):
> Clint Adams wrote:
> > 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.

Thanks for your intervention which is helpful.

> I think it'd be appropriate to allow dependencies on runit (or another
> package that contains an implementation of /sbin/init), as long as
> either the depending package doesn't depend on having /sbin/init be that
> init (which holds true for runit),

Right.

> *or* if an alternative package exists to integrate with the default
> init system.  For instance, git-daemon-run versus
> git-daemon-sysvinit versus a hypothetical git-daemon-systemd,

Personally I think this is a pretty nasty way for the git packages to
have done things, although I understand why.  But, regardless, I think
it's certainly fine from the init system compatibility point of view.

> ...  (Note that the latter would work better if upstart stopped
> conflicting with sysvinit, similar to how systemd can be installed
> without being init.)

There does seem to need to be some work there.

Ian.