Dmitry Bogatov <kact...@disroot.org> writes: > Choice: Affirm Init Diversity
> Being able to run Debian systems with init systems other than > systemd continues to be value for the project. Package not > working with pid1 != systemd is RC bug, unless it was designed > by upstream to work exclusively with systemd. > Since Sam refused to add my option to ballot, hereby I call for seconds. I'm not going to second this because it's not my own preferred choice, but as with the options that Sam is proposing, I will vote this above further discussion and I'm comfortable that it provides clear advice for Policy (with some questions below). >> The implication I would take as Policy editor from this option winning >> is that any systemd service that is not supported by (all?) other init >> systems in Debian must not be used, except in packages whose upstreams >> only support systemd. Packages whose upstreams only support systemd >> may use those facilities freely. > I do not see how it follows from my wording. If under sysvinit server is > started on boot, and under systemd it is started on first request > (socket activation), that is fine as long in both cases servers perform > same. Ah, yes, sorry. By "used" I meant "depended on." In other words, packages may not require systemd-specific services unless the package is of software that upstream has designed to only work with systemd. (They can use them opportunistically if they're available.) >> BTW, if this option passed, I believe the implication would also be >> that all GNOME ecosystem packages can drop all sysvinit support and >> that no maintainers of packages designed upstream to work with logind >> are under any obligation to support elogind. Is that what you intend? > I am fine with these consequences. This is my personal opinion, and do > not represent opinions of other sysvinit maintainers. Okay, good, that makes the Policy implications clear. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>