Re: Bug#1018943: release-notes: document systemd packaging changes for Bookworm
Some thoughts on clarity - from a user pov, given that people reading
release-notes will not be familiar with details:
Luca Boccassi <bluca@debian.org> writes:
> systemd-resolved has been split into a separate package.
> This new systemd-resolved package will not be installed automatically
s/This/The
> on upgrades. If you are using systemd-resolved, please install this
s/are/were
s/this/the
> new package manually
after manually i'd suggest adding "after the upgrade"
and does this change impact people who were using systemd-resolved and
are upgrading over ssh or other remote ways: will they be at risk of
losing their DNS until they install the new package?
>. By installing this package, systemd-resolved will
> take over control of /etc/resolv.conf automatically.
Found the above sentence a little cryptic - think the word "over" is
redundant. Ideally, i'd suggest what it needs is one sentence
explanation of what systemd-resolved is (its man page is a bit of a
jargon-fest - is it just "manages the settings in /etc/resolv.conf"?)
I think it might also help to explain what the debian "default" here is
(even if it didnt change): Is it that resolve.conf is managed "by hand"
unless network manager is installed?
> systemd-boot has been split into a separate package.
> This new systemd-boot package will not be installed automatically on
> upgrades. If you are using systemd-boot, please install this new
> package manually.
As above - "the new package" and "were using" (or - "if you want to use"
might be clearer (here and above)
> The default boot loader in Debian is grub2.
should this end "is still grub2, but systemd-boot can be used instead"?
and is grub2 the right package - on my (current stable) system, "apt
show grub2" tells me it is a transitional package that is going to be
removed - should it say "grub-pc" instead of grub2 here?
> If you have not set up systemd-boot manually, no action is required on
> your side.
"on your side" is not idiomatic/clear - better to end the sentence at
"no action is required".
but is "set up manually" different from "installed"? ("set up" sounds
like some positive action has been taken to edit configuration files,
and "manually" might even mean "not using apt" - but i'm not sure that
is what is meant...)
as above, can it explain (briefly) what a "boot loader" is for those
that don't know (like me) - and how do i tell which one i am using? is
there some reason to prefer systemd-boot over grub or vice-versa?
I'd suggest something like: "A bootloader is responsible for starting
the kernel when the system boots"?
(it says "bootloader" rather than "boot loader" in the description of
grub-pc - not sure which is standard)
And i suggest that this stanza needs to be _very_ explicit about whether
or not systems that were using systemd-boot will become unbootable until
the user installs the new systemd-boot package? (seems pretty important
to clarify to me, even if the answer is that there is no risk!).
> systemd-journal-gatewayd and systemd-journal-remote are now built
> without the --trust option, in order to be able to switch away from
> gnutls to openssl.
Does it need a new heading: "Changes to the systemd journal"? (I almost
missed this the first time i read it)
it's also not very transparent: what command is '--trust' an option for?
(i didnt see it in 'journalctl(1)') and what impact does removing it have?
Eg, is it saying that the systemd journal was using gnutls and is now
using openssl, or is it saying that this change will be done in the
future? (as a user, i'm not sure that such a change is important enough
for the release notes - seems more like something for debian/changelog,
but perhaps i am missing something?)
Thanks for considering
Reply to: