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

Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR

On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 08:58:52AM -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> >>>>> "Wouter" == Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> writes:
>     Wouter> Oh, right. Okay. I suppose that makes sense; the nbd-client
>     Wouter> init script hasn't been touched since I wrote the nbd-client
>     Wouter> systemd unit, and so I can't really guarantee that it will
>     Wouter> work very well anymore.
>     Wouter> I guess I was misunderstanding what Sam was writing
>     Wouter> initially; I thought he just meant that "if you do early
>     Wouter> boot, then we don't care about other init systems", which
>     Wouter> seems like it would make the whole point moot.
>     Wouter> Perhaps
>     Wouter> rather than that, the GR should say something like:
>     Wouter> "Due to the higher level of complexity inherent to
>     Wouter> early-boot services, it is expected that the init scripts
>     Wouter> (or equivalent) for services initialized during early boot
>     Wouter> be maintained by the maintainers of the init system in
>     Wouter> question, rather than by the maintainers of the service's
>     Wouter> package"
> I like this  sentence, and if we get significant support from those who
> favor choice 1, I would accept that amendment.
> Meanwhile, I think I can go as far as
> >Policy notes that early boot services like those started from
> >/etc/rcS.d may be tied closely to the init system in use and thus may
> >need to be handled differently for each init system
> well within the spirit of the current choice 1.

That is definitely clearer, yes.

To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy

  -- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard

Reply to: