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

Bug#947847: please install systemd-sysusers using update-alternatives

On 1/25/20 5:05 PM, Michael Biebl wrote:
> Control: tags -1 + wontfix
> Hi Thomas
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:29:29 +0100 Thomas Goirand <zigo@debian.org> wrote:
>> Package: systemd
>> Version: 244-3
>> Severity: important
>> Hi,
>> As I'm packaging opensysusers (see ITP: #947846), I would like my
>> package to also provide /bin/systemd-sysusers. Please install this
>> binary on another location, so that both systemd and opensysusers can
>> implement it. I am very much fine to have systemd have the priority over
>> opensysusers if you believe it should (I'm open to discussion about
>> priorities).
> Thanks for your interest in systemd-sysusers.
> After thinking more about this, I don't consider renaming
> systemd-sysusers and installing it via alternatives as a good idea.
> When systemd is installed and used, we definitely want to use its own
> implementation.
> My recommendation would be to install the opensysusers implementation
> under a different binary name.
> Alternative init systems can then decide to support sysusers by calling
> that opensysusers binary during boot.
> debhelper, should it get sysusers support, should generate code which
> calls the correct binary depending on the  current circumstances.
> Regards,
> Michael

Hi Michael,

It is my view that what you're proposing would be a lot more work for on
valid reason. I'm therefore re-assigning the bug to the tech-ctte,
asking them to decided instead.

It is my view that using update-alternatives is *very* easy to
implement, so that we can share the /usr/bin/systemd-sysuser location.

Besides the fact that, with the way you're suggesting, we'd need to fix
debhelper (which I don't think is reasonable, as it wont be the only
place to handle multiple cases, I'm foreseeing...), there's also the
concern that you don't seem to agree that it'd be ok for one to use
opensysuser instead of the systemd implementation if systemd is running.
I do not agree with this, and I believe it is up to the users to decide
what to do, even if we, as an operating system, must provide sensible
defaults (which also can be discussed, but that's not the point of this
bug report).

Moreover, I don't see why /usr/bin/systemd-sysusers would be any
different from let's say /usr/bin/awk. The update-alternatives system is
there exactly to handle the case we're facing today.

So, tech-ctte, please decide.


Thomas Goirand (zigo)

Reply to: