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

Re: Tentative summary of the amendments

On 22 October 2014 20:14, Uoti Urpala <uoti.urpala@pp1.inet.fi> wrote:
> Ian Jackson wrote:
>> Jonas Smedegaard writes ("Re: Tentative summary of the amendments"):
>> > Quoting Nikolaus Rath (2014-10-22 05:09:18)
>> > > I believe Ian's intended reading is that a package that depends on
>> > > uselessd | systemd (but does not work with sysvinit) would be allowed
>> > > by his proposal.
>> Yes.
>> In practice such packages are not going to be a big problem because
>> writing init scripts for them would be straightforward, and then the
>> dependency could be relaxed.
> So you agree that there is no fundamental problem with packaging
> software that requires either systemd or uselessd?

That would not be a problem, because uselessd is only an init system
and does not include all the extra services that systemd does, for
example - logind is not a part of uselessd. Therefore, even if
uselessd is packaged tomorrow, there would still be just one init
system in Debian implementing this feature. So the Ians proposal makes
it a bug to depend on features that are only implemented in one init
system. Naturally this whole discussion would become moot if all other
init systems decided to die and were excluded from the archive. Also,
in practise, once you assume that a feature might simply not exist, a
single workaround will work just as fine for all other init systems
that don't have the feature.

I think that practical effect would be the same if we mandated
"support running with at least one non-default init system at PID 1"
or "support running with sysvinit at PID 1" or "support running with
any init systems in the archive at PID 1" from the point of view of
software being able to start with an alternative init system managing
the installation (not from the point of view of having init scripts
for all init systems).

Best regards,
    Aigars Mahinovs        mailto:aigarius@debian.org
 | .''`.    Debian GNU/Linux (http://www.debian.org)            |
 | : :' :   Latvian Open Source Assoc. (http://www.laka.lv)     |
 | `. `'    Linux Administration and Free Software Consulting   |
 |   `-                                 (http://www.aiteki.com) |

Reply to: