Re: Perfect Jessie is something like this...
Le Thu, 30 Oct 2014 02:24:27 -0400,
Marty <martyb@ix.netcom.com> a écrit :
> On 10/29/2014 06:53 AM, Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> > Le Wed, 29 Oct 2014 00:52:54 -0400,
> > Marty <martyb@ix.netcom.com> a écrit :
[...]
> >> By "problem" I meant what I consider the problem of not having an
> >> overlap between old and new solutions, and no deprecation period or
> >> warning. I don't argue that it should not be corrected. My point
> >> was more of a policy and design strategy issue.
> >
> > There is NO functional change at all, what was working before is
> > still working now. The only difference is that you have an extra
> > daemon running from the start (and running in a clean context).
>
> The deprecation issue would not apply to Jessie, just some legacy
> code.
I'm not following you here
> > The daemon here on my machine is using 1224KiB of resident memory,
> > this is nothing on modern machines. I personally don't even see why
> > we are discussing this tbh.
>
> I don't know about you, but I am here because I am trying to decide
> if this is a case of "accidental vendor lock-in" and more broadly if
> there is a backward compatibility policy issue that encourages it, or
> if this is an isolated instance.
>
> There's also the matter of the missing init script, doubts about init
> script support, the freeze, the GR, the vote, and questions about
> deprecation policies in general, as background. At this point I'm
> willing write it off as undecidable, at least by me. :)
There is a /etc/init.d/uuidd initscript currently in jessie, see:
https://packages.debian.org/jessie/amd64/uuid-runtime/filelist
http://sources.debian.net/src/util-linux/2.25.1-5/misc-utils/uuidd.rc.in/
And it has always been clear (at least to me) that all the packages must
continue to support sysvinit and not remove any LSB initscripts for the
jessie release.
Reply to: