Bug#932704: debian-policy: Don't force sysvinit compatibility if e.g. alternate init required
- To: 932704@bugs.debian.org
- Subject: Bug#932704: debian-policy: Don't force sysvinit compatibility if e.g. alternate init required
- From: Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org>
- Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2019 09:18:48 +0200
- Message-id: <[🔎] 87tv8rhaxz.fsf@43-1.org>
- Reply-to: Ansgar <ansgar@43-1.org>, 932704@bugs.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] 20191001224228.DE3BA2D76C@disroot.org> (Dmitry Bogatov's message of "Tue, 01 Oct 2019 22:43:41 +0000")
- References: <8736iy72os.fsf@iris.silentflame.com> <e083aae3ba2ede4487700c6eede9691f14588a52.camel@43-1.org> <87k1c8947a.fsf@athena.silentflame.com> <CAOHcdNYtuYdxWQukuXbnLkQSKNe6Wbkaca6H-q_X+L_XTjDAVQ@mail.gmail.com> <87a7d4fwqp.fsf@iris.silentflame.com> <CAOHcdNY+Pk69BtUV42O9KOTDYshXq_c5SkEfso+9CZ7g62U3ww@mail.gmail.com> <CAOHcdNZgfVpddNy-R9L=fbbTwDdmKDamPnhX-T60S=Jwm-DKvg@mail.gmail.com> <20190925154318.3055D20860@disroot.org> <CAOHcdNZHvSULJguYZP-R5Qej-_8MW2ZSiOq6dk_G7SToJre98w@mail.gmail.com> <CAOHcdNY+Pk69BtUV42O9KOTDYshXq_c5SkEfso+9CZ7g62U3ww@mail.gmail.com> <20190926152637.7505C21ADF@disroot.org> <CAOHcdNY+Pk69BtUV42O9KOTDYshXq_c5SkEfso+9CZ7g62U3ww@mail.gmail.com> <f00034795869e8559bb2fd536a0299c252dc90ca.camel@43-1.org> <CAOHcdNY+Pk69BtUV42O9KOTDYshXq_c5SkEfso+9CZ7g62U3ww@mail.gmail.com> <20190928161844.CEEC823BA4@disroot.org> <87blv4e4hz.fsf@iris.silentflame.com> <CAOHcdNY+Pk69BtUV42O9KOTDYshXq_c5SkEfso+9CZ7g62U3ww@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 20191001224228.DE3BA2D76C@disroot.org> <CAO HcdNY+Pk69BtUV42O9KOTDYshXq_c5SkEfso+9CZ7g62U3ww@mail.gmail.com>
Dmitry Bogatov writes:
> --- a/policy/ch-opersys.rst
> +++ b/policy/ch-opersys.rst
> @@ -1006,7 +1006,9 @@ supported by all init implementations. An exception to this rule is
> scripts or jobs provided by the init implementation itself; such jobs
> may be required for an implementation-specific equivalent of the
> ``/etc/rcS.d/`` scripts and may not have a one-to-one correspondence
> -with the init scripts.
> +with the init scripts. Another exception is when software is only
> +usable, by upstream's design, when pid1 is provided by some other init
> +system.
I don't believe this is a good solution as the list of exceptions would
be cumbersome to maintain (cf. #911165).
Ansgar
Reply to: