Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie
- To: Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org>, 727708@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#727708: call for votes on default Linux init system for jessie
- From: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 15:04:44 +1000
- Message-id: <CAJS_LCVyWXwTGjK0K=poOAz+pVVNGrBxu1_rcBLz7H6079XeVA@mail.gmail.com>
- Reply-to: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>, 727708@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <20140129111333.GA14297@riva.ucam.org>
- References: <87wqhoosaf.fsf@rover.gag.com> <21223.38663.210755.327416@chiark.greenend.org.uk> <CAJS_LCXhqY5uBbTM6s9PujaGDoS_UXKjqbd9LxHmRvFstr-T+g@mail.gmail.com> <20140129111333.GA14297@riva.ucam.org>
Hey Colin,
On 29 January 2014 21:13, Colin Watson <cjwatson@debian.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 07:21:43AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
>> > Q2: Is it OK for packages to depend on a specific init system as
>> > pid 1 ?
>> Q2a: Is it OK for packages providing init systems to provide other
>> APIs beyond just the minimum needed for starting/stopping services?
> We might disagree on the extent, perhaps, but I doubt anyone on the
> committee would vote against this in its general form;
So looking at the votes today, I would have said that both Ian and
Andi's original votes are against this (ranking the options which
allow specifying a dependency on a specific init below further
discussion), and probably Steve's does too, although I assume that's
more an objection against the wording.
At least, the impact seems like it is:
- init systems can provide whatever extra APIs they like
- other packages can only use extra APIs if they have a dependency on
the providing package
- packages may not depend on specific init systems
* therefore packages cannot use the extra APIs
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>
Reply to: