On Wed, 05 Feb 2014, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > > IMHO, they goes into initscripts. That avoids an extra dependence > > (initscripts -> sysvinit-utils). > > This definitely make some sense, but most of initscripts are parts > that I suspect upstart and systemd will want to replace, as their
... > While sysvinit-utils contain tools useful for any boot system > (fstab-decode, killall5, last, lastb, mesg, pidof, service, startpar > and sulogin), and the init-d-script code is more a tool for packages > writing init.d scripts than it is a integrated part of the boot > framework. Since regular packages using the helper will require either a versioned depends or even pre-depends on the package that hosts it, we REALLY don't want to have to move it from a package to a different package later. IMHO, for that reason, sysvinit-utils is a much safer place for the init-d helper. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh _______________________________________________ Pkg-sysvinit-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-sysvinit-devel
