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

Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?

Hi Arturo,

Quoting Arturo Borrero Gonzalez (2016-08-26 09:19:23)
> here the author of that changelog line.
> The rationale for the change was:
>  * the default init system in debian is systemd
>  * I don't have any sysvinit system to keep sysvinit files under any
> kind of maintenance
>  * sysvinit conntrackd script is really poor, to reliably use
> conntrackd as a systemd daemon you should use systemd
>  * conntrackd & systemd are very good integrated (using libsystemd)
>  * systemd is starting to drop support for some sysvinit mechanisms [0]
>  * it's time to let sysvinit die
> So, obviously from my point of view, lack of sysvinit support is not a bug.
> The conntrackd software is a very specific daemon which is usually run
> in a very concrete scenario.
> In most of these scenarios, you will need the software to be started
> and stopped *reliably*,
> ordering other system services with it *reliably* (for example, at system boot).
> Right now, conntrackd is integrated with libsystemd so the daemon
> reports startup & shutdown
> reliably to systemd (also includes watchdog support).
> If you are about to build a firewall cluster and you choose between
> sysvinit and systemd,
> no serious implementation would use sysvinit, so I think the sysvinit
> support here is simply irrelevant.

even if you cannot test it, was sysvinit support reported as being broken by

If yes, did sysvinit supporters fail to supply a patch to make it work again?

If no, is the sysvinit support in the package braking other parts of the
package or makes certain features of it impossible?

In general, I don't think maintainers should remove existing features from
their package even if they cannot test them. This is, until said feature either
blocks progress or is broken and there is nobody around fixing it. Indeed, if
we would only allow ourselves to ship features that we can or are able to test,
then we would have to restrict ourselves to shipping very simplistic software


cheers, josch

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: signature

Reply to: