Re: Is it the job of Lintian to push an agenda?
Am Sa., 13. Juli 2019 um 22:04 Uhr schrieb Vincent Bernat <bernat@debian.org>:
>
> ❦ 13 juillet 2019 11:52 -07, Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org>:
>
> >> Previously, we had a sort of agreement (through the TC decision) that
> >> such scripts should be maintained by people caring about them and we
> >> should only act on bug reports with proper patches to have them.
> >
> > I don't agree that this was ever the agreement.
>
> I was referring to
> <https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=746715> but it seems
> it only applies to non-SysV init script, my bad.
>
> I am still unhappy with the situation, but I don't think it is worth
> arguing about it as I am pretty sure it will have no impact whatsoever.
What will have an impact is moving
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=911165> forward, I
guess.
Writing init scripts for sysvinit is a massive amount of work for
non-simple cases, and my own software as well as other software
projects don't actually ship sysvinit scripts anymore (simply because
testing them just isn't worth the time and effort if you can actually
achieve what you wanted easier).
While I think it's fair to request from package maintainers to merge
compatibility scripts for sysvinit, forcing them to write sysvinit
scripts while our default init systemd is systemd and where even
testing those scripts is a major pain is IMHO not.
There was a long discussion on not-shipping / dropping sysvinit
scripts in a request to the TC in 2016
<https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=835507>, I am
assuming you meant that when talking about a TC ruling. No decision
was made there though, and normal policy processes should resolve
this.
With two Debian stable releases defaulting to systemd now, I think a
solid case could be made to at least relax the "must" requirement to a
"should" in policy (but that should better go to the respective bug
report).
Cheers,
Matthias
--
I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/
Reply to: