On 2018-10-16 13:27, Matthew Vernon wrote:
So:
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/debian-init-diversity
It's a standard mailman list with a public archive. I'm hoping people
interested in init system diversity in Debian can use it as a place to
co-ordinate. I don't want it to be used to slag off $init_system or
$distribution_or_derivative.
Could someone reiterate about what the current state of init diversity
is supposed to be? Is it assumed to be best effort of every maintainer
being required to ship an init script next to the systemd unit that is
actually used by default[1]? Can we rely on sysvinit users to report the
bugs with the scripts or how intensively do they need to be tested?
Similarly, are maintainers allowed to ship timer units in lieu of
cronjobs? As an example I invested some time in
prometheus-node-exporter[2] to run textfile collectors of monitoring
data (SMART, apt) in the background. Would I have been required by
policy to make sure that all of this also works on a system with
sysvinit? Note that this includes the usage of file presence checks and
OnBootSec, so I suppose that'd mean both anacron and cron as well as an
actual shell script that checks for the preconditions. Would anacron and
cron need to be depended upon in that case or would they could they even
just be recommended? Both would not be needed on a default Debian system
that ships with systemd.
Kind regards and thanks
Philipp Kern
[1]
"Alternative init implementations must support running SysV init scripts
as described at System run levels and init.d scripts for compatibility."
[https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#alternate-init-systems]
[2]
https://packages.qa.debian.org/p/prometheus-node-exporter/news/20181015T165248Z.html
