On Friday, 5 de September de 2014 18:52:44 Zack Weinberg escribió: > Abstractly, I believe the ideal situation would be for all init systems > in the archive to be *completely* co-installable, with /sbin/init a > symlink under control of the administrator; under no circumstances would > installing or upgrading any package change that symlink. (It follows > that systems upgraded from wheezy might wind up with systemd > _installed_, but sysvinit would remain the active init until the local > admin changed things manually. Obviously this would need to be > documented.) I was thinking on all of this yesterday, when walking back from work to home, when I realized it: It is just wrong to have dependencies on the init system. If you need dbus, you should Depend on dbus, and systemd should Provides dbus. Then, if Ann programs her Own Dbus Implementation she can package it as aodi (Ann's Own Dbus Implementation) and have aodi Provides dbus. Same for logind (systemd Provides logind and random-package Depends logind), and any other piece of the big systemd ecosystem. Any dependence on systemd or any other init system should be considered an RC bug (except only packages designed to manage the init system, like an imaginary systemd-tweaking-tool). Do you need a cron system for a daily task? Just depend on timely-task, and have both systemd and cron provide timely-task. This way we put the decision, and thus the power to configure their systems, back in sysadmins hands, instead of stealing that power for us. Regards Noel er Envite
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.