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

The insserv mess - or how not to change important parts of systems

Dear Petter,

this is an excerpt from your last sysvinit upload's changelog:

sysvinit  (2.87dsf-2) unstable; urgency=low

   * Let sysv-rc depend on insserv (>= 1.12.0-10) to activate
     dependency based boot sequencing by default.

Do you *REALLY* think that changing such important pieces of systems should be
done without discussing it first on an appropriate list like debian-devel?

Also I'm wondering when and how you've tested the insserv package. Looking at
bugs like #475478 and #538959 I start to wonder if you did an appropriate
testing at all (Hint: there is experimental to test things). And looking at
replies like

" Insserv will become essential together with sysv-rc, and is not
supposed to be simple to remove any more.  Dependency based boot
sequencing is going to become the default and suppoted boot sequencing
method.  I'll remove the option to disable it. "

to bug reports I'm not sure any more if you should maintain such an essential

Yes, this mail has a bit more harsh tone than it should probably have, but it
pretty much reflects the result of having fun with broken systems in the morning.


 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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: