Re: default init on non-Linux platforms
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 01:11:21AM +0800, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> Actually, thinking about it a 2nd time, I think there would be a major
> drawback in delaying to Jessie +1. If we decide that sysv-rc goes away,
> then starting at the Jessie release, we don't have to care anymore about
> LSB header scripts. Meaning that we could write systemd service files,
> plus OpenRC runscripts (for those who cares about OpenRC, or our
> non-linux ports).
Idea: someone is working on a service->runscript interpreter, for a subset
of common functionality. If that tool could have a validator that returns
ok if there's no unsupported stanza, what about running that validator in
lintian and screaming if validation fails but there is no runscript?
This way, there'd be three kinds of packages:
* LSB only
* service that's palatable for OpenRC
* service + runscript
This would greatly simplify preparing for deprecation of sysv-rc. Hopefully
somewhere to the tune of 90-95% packages having just one daemon definition.
Such a reduction of work could make dropping sysv-rc in jessie viable.
> If we delay it, this means that we'd have to keep maintaining LSB header
> scripts in Sid for all the life of Jessie (for those who cares about
> non-linux ports or having OpenRC / sysv-rc support).
If we need to suffer systemd but can't use the main benefit of new-style
init systems, what the whole brouchacha was for? As OpenRC is supposed to
be a drop-in replacement, and upstart has dropped the towel, migrating by
Jessie would allow supporting only two init systems by Zurg¹ with nothing
but 1.05 declarative definition per daemon package.
[¹]. What do you mean, neilm doesn't get to name jessie+1?
--
A tit a day keeps the vet away.
Reply to: