Re: systemd and Linux are *fundamentally incompatible* -> and I can prove it
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512
On 03/30/2014 10:57 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> On 03/30/2014 08:02 PM, The Wanderer wrote:
>
>> If it's been decided to continue to require package maintainers to
>> provide traditional init scripts as well as systemd unit files -
>> e.g. for Debian's non-Linux ports - then that benefit would be
>> lost.
<snip>
>> If it hasn't, then I think it's entirely foreseeable that package
>> maintainers will at some point stop providing traditional init
>> scripts.
>
> They should absolutely *not* remove init scripts that are working. If
> someone does, I would advise to first politely ask him to revert the
> regression. And probably asking the TC to force the maintainer to do
> so if he refuses would be a good idea.
What about an init script that used to work, but has stopped working,
due to e.g. a change in the rest of the package or a change in the
surrounding system?
Obviously if someone comes up with a fix to get it working again, the
same "maintainers who don't maintain traditional init scripts should
accept patches from others" would apply. If no such fix is forthcoming,
however, I can easily see a maintainer deciding to drop the nonworking
init script.
>> At that point, unless a means of producing init scripts from unit
>> files (which, last I heard, had been judged impossible) has been
>> found, the amount of work required to continue to run sysvinit
>> would be far more than the terminology of "changing the default"
>> implies.
>
> I don't agree. We currently, at this point, have 100% full support
> for sysv-rc LSB-header scripts. I don't see it going away that fast.
I was explicitly referring to the point in the future when maintainers
do stop providing traditional init scripts. This likely won't happen
that fast, no, but I do think it's likely that it will happen - whether
days after the jessie release or decades, or more likely something in
between.
My point, insofar as I had one, was more about what terminology is
appropriate to use in discussing this than anything else.
(I don't think I see anything to disagree with in the rest of what you
said.)
- --
The Wanderer
Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny.
A government exists to serve its citizens, not to control them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=DM69
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: