Re: [draft] Draft text on Init Systems GR
On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 06:32:32PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Wouter Verhelst <email@example.com> writes:
> > I think a better solution is to accept that some maintainers simply
> > won't have the time or inclination to maintain support for non-default
> > init systems, and that such init scripts (or whatever) should therefore
> > be packaged separately from the main package, maintained by someone who
> > actually uses the init system in question.
> It's not clear that this is technically feasible, so I'm not sure that it
> makes sense to mandate this solution in a GR.
I'm not so sure about that. What do you think makes it not technically
We have historically shipped init scripts with the daemon that they serve, but
there is no reason why we wouldn't be able to change that behavior.
There could definitely be a package "initscripts" that contains init
scripts which call binaries not in the same package.
To the thief who stole my anti-depressants: I hope you're happy
-- seen somewhere on the Internet on a photo of a billboard