control: tags -1 +moreinfo
[2018-12-20 09:15] Ansgar Burchardt <[email protected]> > > [2014-09-16 18:00] Ansgar Burchardt <[email protected]> > >> The symlinks in /etc/rc?.d/* and /etc/default/* are configuration files, > >> but init script themselves are not (and if admins are supposed to modify > >> them, I would call them buggy). > > > > Your proposal contradicts Debian Policy (9.3.2): > > No, all scripts in /etc/init.d would still be treated as configuration > files. Just packages could choose to *not* do that (as is the sane > way) by shipping init scripts in a different location. Oh, complications. Here I support previous comment, complications, shadowing system for little gain. > Policy also seems to lag a decade behind reality: > [...] > > It's possible to disable services without editing /etc/init.d/*. > It's possible to do that without editing /etc/init.d/*. (/etc/default/*) There are other modifications admin may like to apply. We can't anticipate them all. eatmydata? nice? unshare? nsenter? > Allowing packages to not have init scripts as configuration files would > help dealing with outdated init scripts (from removed, but not purged > packages) which cause problems (for example when they lack LSB headers, > have outdated dependencies which cause cirular dependencies, ...). Yes, there is trade-off. But as I see it, your proposal favors solving issues of past (missing LSB headers, outdated scripts), which will be solved eventually, to flexibility of all current and future installation. In short: I value possibility to edit /etc/init.d/ scripts and do not find logic complexity of your proposal warranted.
