Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> writes:

> systemd upstream will drop support for the transitional sysv generator
> in the near future. The transition is long finished, it's been at least
> a decade, and it's time for the tail of packages still shipping only
> init scripts but not units to be updated.

Has there already been a mass bug filing for packages that ship init
scripts but not systemd unit files?

> Tentatively this should happen within Trixie's development cycle. Of
> course it's free software and generators are not that difficult to
> maintain, so if someone wanted to lift the sysv generator out of the
> systemd repository and adapt it to be a standalone binary there's
> nothing stopping them. But I wouldn't want the systemd package to
> depend on such a backward compat tool, so packages needing this
> hyptothetical package should depend explicitly on it. This is just
> mentioned for completeness, it's been at least a decade and writing a
> unit file is beyond trivial so there shouldn't be any issue adding the
> few remaining ones.

> Once the policy is updated I plan to ask Lintian to bump the severity
> of the existing check:

> https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/merge_requests/407

Assuming the mass bug filing hasn't already happened and I missed it, I
think this is the wrong order.  This sort of large-scale breaking change
should always start with a mass bug filing against all affected packages.
I think the right process is:

* Raise this in debian-devel and propose a mass bug filing requiring all
  packages to add systemd unit files if they currently only have init
  scripts.  This gives people the opportunity to object or take over
  maintenance of the unit file generator and document how to depend on it
  if they wish to do that instead.  (I don't think that's a good idea, but
  we should let the discussion happen.)

* Unless something surprising happens in that discussion, do a mass bug
  filing for this transition and bump the Lintian severity at the same
  time.

* Once that has consensus and is underway, *then* change Policy to reflect
  this project decision.

If the mass bug filing already happened and I just didn't notice, my
apologies.

-- 
Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org)              <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>

Reply via email to