Re: Bug#727708: tech-ctte: Decide which init system to default to in Debian.
Wouter Verhelst <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Also, since all alternative init implementations under consideration do
> support sysv-style init scripts, I think that whatever init system we
> (well, you, the TC) end up choosing, the requirement in policy should be
> that a package should ship either some init configuration for the
> default init system, or a sysv-style init script. In fact, I think we
> should continue to encourage the latter, in cases where it does make
> sense (e.g., when a given daemon doesn't have any init system specific
> features that could be enabled), since that will help our non-Linux
> ports without significantly impacting performance of the new init
Well, I've said this before, but I think it's worth reiterating. Either
upstart or systemd configurations are *radically better* than init scripts
on basically every axis. They're more robust, more maintainable, easier
for the local administrator to fix and revise, better on package upgrades,
support new capabilities, etc.
I believe that much of the benefit for adopting a new init system is
dropping init scripts and using a much better configuration language. If
we're not going to take advantage of that benefit, it calls into question
whether we should change init systems at all.
In other words, I don't think it would make any sense at all to
standardize on upstart or systemd and then ask people to continue to write
init scripts in the long run (transition issues aside). Getting rid of
init scripts is not the whole point, but it's a huge part of it.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>