[2018-10-17 16:42] Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> > Obviously when there are situations where providing an init script is > actually wrong (because under sysvinit or other systems the daemon is > started some other way), the init script should not be provided. > > In the existing text, this could be done as follows: > > | However, any package integrating with other init systems must also > | be backwards-compatible with sysvinit > > + | , usually > > | by providing a SysV-style init > | script with the same name as and equivalent functionality to any > | init-specific job
Agreed. This way lintian check logic could be changed to following: * If package provides .service, it must provide /some/ init script, without checking for name. * If package provides .timer, it must provide /some/ cronttab. If for some reason it is not feasible (e.g service, designed by upstream to only run under systemd, then it is override). > As for the Russ's point about exact equivalence, that would be dealt > with by something like this: > > | script with the same name as and > > + | roughly > > | equivalent functionality to any > | init-specific job Second. -- Note, that I send and fetch email in batch, once in a few days. Please, mention in body of your reply when you add or remove recepients.