Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On 29.11.2014 19:15, Svante Signell wrote: Since there is no interest in adding a debconf message on new installs, I wish for a menu entry in the advanced part of the installer to be able to install a new system with sysvinit-core or upstart! +1 -- mit freundlichen Grüßen -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consulting +49-151-27565287 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5481a9ed.1010...@gr13.net
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: Hello, In summary: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. More detailed: 1) Fix debootstrap bugs 2) Add a (non-aborting) debconf message referring to release-notes on how to install sysvinit-core when installing from scratch. 3) Add information in release-notes on how to: - Upgrade from stable/testing/sid to jessie to avoid getting systemd-sysv installed (this should not strictly be needed if the ctte chooses to decide that upgrades will _not_ switch init) - Install sysvinit-core after installation and reboot after getting systemd-sysv as default. 3.1) I'll file a bug against release-notes as written above. Hopefully the ctte will make a decision on init system for upgrades to Jessie today! FYI: Bugs for release-notes on upgrades, #771825, and installation-guide (and perhaps debian wiki) on new installs (pending), are in the pipe! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417692256.3453.60.ca...@g3620.my.own.domain
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 12:30 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:14:07PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: That's even more unlikely than to add a debconf message (which would be package-owned). Yes, debian-installer is frozen. This would add new udebs, new strings, new everything. We're actually trying to release. Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. Indeed. Jessie should be released once large numbers of our users [will] no longer have a bad experience as a result of being switched to systemd [because all relevant bugs have been fixed]. As somebody who is active in user support on IRC I dread the jessie release if it means that we will ask people for years to come if they have switched to systemd after their upgrade and, if not, walk them through the process. So far most users who had a bad experience with jessie did so because they did *not* switch and the fact that -shim wasn't ready. having a bad experience should directly translate into bugs that can, and have to, be fixed before the release. I would welcome a more technical discussion at this point rather than an emotional one. Thank you and everybody else for their wonderful work and patience. -- Wolodja deb...@babilen5.org 4096R/CAF14EFC 081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA 36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
Am 29.11.2014 um 22:01 schrieb Philipp Kern: On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote: Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. Sure. But where is the evidence for that? Is there a bug that has been agreed upon to be RC? Whoever upgrades their lxc guests without taking further informed action (such as switching back to sysv), will not be able to start their LXC VM at the next reboot( #766233 [1]). This is currently classified as a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone. and thus not RC, so if being RC is currently the precondition to fix stuff in jessie, then you are right. Unless at least respective documentation gets included in the release notes (#762194 [2]) I think there will be some future unhappiness. At this moment it's a trap waiting to be walked into. *t [1] http://bugs.debian.org/766233 [2] https://bugs.debian.org/762194 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/547c9de8.5020...@sourcepole.ch
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
Quoting Tomas Pospisek (2014-12-01 17:57:12) Am 29.11.2014 um 22:01 schrieb Philipp Kern: On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote: Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. Sure. But where is the evidence for that? Is there a bug that has been agreed upon to be RC? Whoever upgrades their lxc guests without taking further informed action (such as switching back to sysv), will not be able to start their LXC VM at the next reboot( #766233 [1]). This is currently classified as a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone. and thus not RC, so if being RC is currently the precondition to fix stuff in jessie, then you are right. Unless at least respective documentation gets included in the release notes (#762194 [2]) I think there will be some future unhappiness. At this moment it's a trap waiting to be walked into. *t [1] http://bugs.debian.org/766233 [2] https://bugs.debian.org/762194 What does evidence even mean here? I expect systemd itself to be in good shape, not buggy. But I do suspect that Debian-with-systemd is in lesser good shape, especially on existing systems some of which were creating by standards now discouraged (e.g. / and /usr on separate partitions). By switching init system we are shaking the tree, revealing bugs in other code which lay dormant till now. Molly-guard seems to now fail on systems with separate / and /usr due to /usr being unmounted before molly-guard is called (bug#771572) - smells like broken init system interactions, but likely an old bug in Molly-guard just not revealed until exposed to a modern init system. Should that bug be RC? How to collect potential evidence, while playing nice with systemd maintainers, release team and others who are less worried? - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private signature.asc Description: signature
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
I demand that Stephan Seitz may or may not have written... On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:41:23PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: On Nov 28, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the system administrator chooses otherwise. Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed the default syslog. The grub1 bootloader was not replaced when Debian changed to grub2. If Debian changed from exim to postfix the existing MTA would not be changed. So keep your hands of the init system on upgrades. Seconded. FWIW, I'm using lilo. That's still available, maintained and working, and I see no reason to change: grub offers more complexity and more options, but lilo does exactly what I want/need of it. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. It would be totally unacceptable to waste the time of every Debian user with pointless advertisement. This question could be part of the expert menu. I for one would welcome this. When I last checked, there was such a question regarding choice of boot loader (and, presumably, that's still there). -- | _ | Darren Salt, using Debian GNU/Linux (and Android) | ( ) | | X | ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML e-mail | / \ | http://www.asciiribbon.org/ To light a candle is to cast a shadow. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54741ae384%lists...@moreofthesa.me.uk
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
* Darren Salt lists...@moreofthesa.me.uk [141130 14:17]: I demand that Stephan Seitz may or may not have written... On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:41:23PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: On Nov 28, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the system administrator chooses otherwise. Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed the default syslog. The grub1 bootloader was not replaced when Debian changed to grub2. If Debian changed from exim to postfix the existing MTA would not be changed. So keep your hands of the init system on upgrades. Seconded. FWIW, I'm using lilo. That's still available, maintained and working, and I see no reason to change: grub offers more complexity and more options, but lilo does exactly what I want/need of it. Actually, no, it's not. lilo appears to pass root=device ID (not name!, e.g. 803) under some conditions, and apparently the i-t maintainers did not ever see this because it's an uncommon configuration nowadays (and there's now an open bug and good luck on getting that fixed in a reasonable way). Uncommon configurations need people actually using them to find AND fix bugs that are caused by such deviations from the common configs. -- ,''`. Christian Hofstaedtler z...@debian.org : :' : Debian Developer `. `' 7D1A CFFA D9E0 806C 9C4C D392 5C13 D6DB 9305 2E03 `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141130145221.GA1307@sx.local
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
One claim is changed, see below. On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: Hello, In summary: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. Since there is no interest in adding a debconf message on new installs, I wish for a menu entry in the advanced part of the installer to be able to install a new system with sysvinit-core or upstart! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417284908.6826.3.ca...@gmail.com
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: One claim is changed, see below. On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: Hello, In summary: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. Since there is no interest in adding a debconf message on new installs, I wish for a menu entry in the advanced part of the installer to be able to install a new system with sysvinit-core or upstart! That's even more unlikely than to add a debconf message (which would be package-owned). Yes, debian-installer is frozen. This would add new udebs, new strings, new everything. We're actually trying to release. Kind regards Philipp Kern signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:14 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: One claim is changed, see below. On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: Hello, In summary: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. Since there is no interest in adding a debconf message on new installs, I wish for a menu entry in the advanced part of the installer to be able to install a new system with sysvinit-core or upstart! That's even more unlikely than to add a debconf message (which would be package-owned). Yes, debian-installer is frozen. This would add new udebs, new strings, new everything. We're actually trying to release. This is another nail in the Universal OS coffin: Let's move to devuan, please! Use Debian as upstream (as long as it lives) Yes, next Debian release is lendows, not jessie :( -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417290006.6826.7.ca...@gmail.com
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On 29-11-2014 19:40, Svante Signell wrote: [...] This is another nail in the Universal OS coffin: Let's move to devuan, please! Use Debian as upstream (as long as it lives) Yes, next Debian release is lendows, not jessie :( Thanks! We appreciate less noise on these lists and on the next release - which it's currently frozen, although you don't care. Good luck. -- Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards, Miguel Figueiredo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/547a1846.7010...@debianpt.org
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:40 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: This is another nail in the Universal OS coffin: Let's move to devuan, please! You are of course free to do that. This discussion is about what Debian should do, however. If you wish to discuss Devuan, please do so in a more appropriate forum. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417292348.2472.4.ca...@adam-barratt.org.uk
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:19 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 20:40 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: This is another nail in the Universal OS coffin: Let's move to devuan, please! You are of course free to do that. This discussion is about what Debian should do, however. If you wish to discuss Devuan, please do so in a more appropriate forum. Yes, I'll do that. But it does not seem like you are realizing what is happening unfortunately. Debian will not be as it was historically due to this issue. Maybe the new DDs are to young to learn from history? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417292862.6826.11.ca...@gmail.com
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:14:07PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: One claim is changed, see below. On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: Hello, In summary: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. Since there is no interest in adding a debconf message on new installs, I wish for a menu entry in the advanced part of the installer to be able to install a new system with sysvinit-core or upstart! That's even more unlikely than to add a debconf message (which would be package-owned). Yes, debian-installer is frozen. This would add new udebs, new strings, new everything. We're actually trying to release. Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. I am not saying that making init systems a choice in the installer is the right solution here; I don't think that it is. But I also don't think that the release freeze can reasonably be an argument against it. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141129203049.gc16...@virgil.dodds.net
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 21:27 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: But it does not seem like you are realizing what is happening unfortunately. Debian will not be as it was historically due to this issue. Maybe the new DDs are to young to learn from history? Please don't patronise people. Just because someone disagrees with you, it doesn't mean that they're naive and unseeing and would be so much better off if you could just lift the mist from in front of their eyes. I'll stop contributing to the noise myself now, apologies to everyone else. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417293389.2472.6.ca...@adam-barratt.org.uk
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote: Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. Sure. But where is the evidence for that? Is there a bug that has been agreed upon to be RC? I am not saying that making init systems a choice in the installer is the right solution here; I don't think that it is. But I also don't think that the release freeze can reasonably be an argument against it. Not even the release freeze, rather the d-i freeze. Unless this is RC for d-i, that is. Kind regards Philipp Kern -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/fb3501d01e459459d6fc914e13e8a...@hub.kern.lc
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 22:01 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote: Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. Sure. But where is the evidence for that? Is there a bug that has been agreed upon to be RC? I am not saying that making init systems a choice in the installer is the right solution here; I don't think that it is. But I also don't think that the release freeze can reasonably be an argument against it. Not even the release freeze, rather the d-i freeze. Unless this is RC for d-i, that is Ok, I've tried to no avail. Debian is no democracy (maybe never was). ctte do as you feel there are no alternative solutions, just state the fact with your decision EOT. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417296351.6826.13.ca...@gmail.com
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
On Sat, 29 Nov 2014 12:30:49 -0800, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 08:14:07PM +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 07:15:08PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: One claim is changed, see below. On Fri, 2014-11-28 at 12:56 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: Hello, In summary: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. Since there is no interest in adding a debconf message on new installs, I wish for a menu entry in the advanced part of the installer to be able to install a new system with sysvinit-core or upstart! That's even more unlikely than to add a debconf message (which would be package-owned). Yes, debian-installer is frozen. This would add new udebs, new strings, new everything. We're actually trying to release. Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. I am not saying that making init systems a choice in the installer is the right solution here; I don't think that it is. But I also don't think that the release freeze can reasonably be an argument against it. Amen. With all the technical issues in systemd popping up just now, we have frozen prematurely. Greetings Marc -- -- !! No courtesy copies, please !! - Marc Haber |Questions are the | Mailadresse im Header Mannheim, Germany | Beginning of Wisdom | http://www.zugschlus.de/ Nordisch by Nature | Lt. Worf, TNG Rightful Heir | Fon: *49 621 72739834 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1xupbp-0002gh...@swivel.zugschlus.de
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
[I've removed the blatant trolling from the subject line.] Marc Haber wrote: With all the technical issues in systemd popping up just now, we have frozen prematurely. On the contrary, that's precisely what the freeze is *for*: to stop taking new development that doesn't fix bugs (and potentially introduces new ones), while accepting changes that fix bugs, in an effort to reduce the number of bugs and put out a release. In Linux terms: the merge window has closed, time to focus on stability and bugfixes and put out a release. Personally, I'm quite impressed by the speed and quality of the efforts by the systemd team to triage and fix issues. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141129224149.GA5600@thin
Re: Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
2014-11-29 22:25 GMT+01:00 Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com: On Sat, 2014-11-29 at 22:01 +0100, Philipp Kern wrote: On 2014-11-29 21:30, Steve Langasek wrote: Debian releases when it's ready. If large numbers of our users are going to have a bad experience with jessie as a result of being switched to systemd, then we should take appropriate steps to address that, even if that means unfreezing the installer. Sure. But where is the evidence for that? Is there a bug that has been agreed upon to be RC? I am not saying that making init systems a choice in the installer is the right solution here; I don't think that it is. But I also don't think that the release freeze can reasonably be an argument against it. Not even the release freeze, rather the d-i freeze. Unless this is RC for d-i, that is Ok, I've tried to no avail. Debian is no democracy (maybe never was). It never was a democracy - it was and is a meritocracy, described as the reign of knowledge[1]. And we are going quite well with that. [1]: http://debian-handbook.info/browse/wheezy/sect.debian-internals.html#idp5715200 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/caknhny9tvwok2yyutyjmokta+yh+uyk0sga8dralf8gjzmi...@mail.gmail.com
Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
Hello, In the (last) hope that the CTTE will bring this issue on the agenda next meeting on December 4. Additional information below and a short summary. On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 09:56 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote: (another partial? solution is to change order of the (pre-)depends of the init package, as proposed in No, that breaks due to the bug in debootstrap’s dependency “resolver” (see #557322, #668001, #768062) and the unwillingness of KiBi to fix that. That is, it breaks fresh installs. Note, this (long-time) refusal to make changes to that package has to be weighted in when the CTTE is discussing this issue: There are very small patches available before the freeze Wed, 5 Nov 2014 (Sun, 22 Nov 2009 and Fri, 17 Oct 2014) that has not been addressed by the maintainer: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=557322#24 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=668001#20 and reported working https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=668001#50 And according to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=762194 with preliminary results in https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=762194#142 the order of pre-depends for int init package should change from Pre-Depends: systemd-sysv | sysvinit-core | upstart to Pre-Depends: sysvinit-core | systemd-sysv | upstart (I hope I made the correct links and conclusions) 1) Heavily advertise (release-notes?) that doing an upgrade from wheezy/etc to jessie will give you systemd as init system and inform about the apt pinning solution. That should be a given, a minimum, independent of the others. I'll file a bug against release notes about the release-notes! In summary: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. More detailed: 1) Fix debootstrap bugs 2) Add a (non-aborting) debconf message referring to release-notes on how to install sysvinit-core when installing from scratch. 3) Add information in release-notes on how to: - Upgrade from stable/testing/sid to jessie to avoid getting systemd-sysv installed (this should not strictly be needed if the ctte chooses to decide that upgrades will _not_ switch init) - Install sysvinit-core after installation and reboot after getting systemd-sysv as default. 3.1) I'll file a bug against release-notes as written above. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1417175791.11764.416.ca...@g3620.my.own.domain
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote: the order of pre-depends for int init package should change from Pre-Depends: systemd-sysv | sysvinit-core | upstart to Pre-Depends: sysvinit-core | systemd-sysv | upstart That would probably require changes in d-i to ensure that systemd is, indeed, installed by default on fresh installs, but otherwise has the most chance of keeping existing systems running properly, so I think that this change is fair, yes. a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. Are there any upgrade paths where software existing in wheezy requires systemd in jessie? If so, these are corner cases where switching init may or may not be avoidable; if not, present a debconf message here. But the vast majority probably should not (need to; even GNOME can work with the shim) switch, yes. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. I think this is not fair, though. CTTE decided that systemd be the default init system for Linux in jessie “period”. That means no debconf message required here. Do note that new installs of kFreeBSD and Hurd should not get systemd, but what exactly is probably up to the porters for lack of a CTTE decision in that. 1) Fix debootstrap bugs Yesplease! bye, //mirabilos -- «MyISAM tables -will- get corrupted eventually. This is a fact of life. » “mysql is about as much database as ms access” – “MSSQL at least descends from a database” “it's a rebranded SyBase” “MySQL however was born from a flatfile and went downhill from there” – “at least jetDB doesn’t claim to be a database” ‣‣‣ Please, http://deb.li/mysql and MariaDB, finally die! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.11.1411281257100.10...@tglase.lan.tarent.de
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Nov 28, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the system administrator chooses otherwise. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. It would be totally unacceptable to waste the time of every Debian user with pointless advertisement. This can be documented in the release notes, if needed. -- ciao, Marco pgpa3iMNK8pLZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On 28/11/14 11:56, Svante Signell wrote: 3) Add information in release-notes on how to: - Upgrade from stable/testing/sid to jessie to avoid getting systemd-sysv installed (this should not strictly be needed if the ctte chooses to decide that upgrades will _not_ switch init) This part has already been done; the release notes contain instructions on how to pin systemd-sysv to never be installed: https://www.debian.org/releases/jessie/amd64/release-notes/ch-information.en.html#systemd-upgrade-default-init-system - Install sysvinit-core after installation and reboot after getting systemd-sysv as default. This bit, however, does appear to still need documenting in the Release Notes and Installation Guide. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54787c99.9050...@zen.co.uk
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On 2014-11-28 14:41, Marco d'Itri wrote: On Nov 28, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote: [...] b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. It would be totally unacceptable to waste the time of every Debian user with pointless advertisement. This can be documented in the release notes, if needed. I suspect it would fit better in the installation-guide. The release-notes concerns itself mainly with upgrades and not with fresh installs. ~Niels -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54787d58.3090...@thykier.net
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, On 28.11.2014 14:41, Marco d'Itri wrote: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the system administrator chooses otherwise. I disagree: This is not safe and can break systems. I have a system where the network connection is so important that the pppd is invoked via the inittab, which is a published interface of the init system and has been for decades. When an upgrade installs systemd, this machine will simply drop off the network. Other systems I have have serial consoles only, also configured via inittab. Installing systemd there will lock me out. I gladly support systemd as default for new installations, but I think upgrades should remain safe to install as far as possible. Simon -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iJwEAQECAAYFAlR4gLkACgkQ0sfeulffv7ts4AQAiLYVwGKyhUpVAvMMpM1aHY/J mnCjhPhhTr3TgDP5raQUF5PjpYbjD5wTvdPQlN0inq+2cThcLg9oWLTd8Jm1z2mg CHLItGDJ1VoIFA3Xb2JJtTwb3KVdpd2x6m9+Ibm6Hjvjj/JQKkwdKQ+TVpmL+C2K r3P87zHHV9sWcSGqlvI= =N+z1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/547880c2.7030...@debian.org
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Marco d'Itri wrote: On Nov 28, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the system administrator chooses otherwise. I disagree with you, and so does CTTE, this time: they said that existing installations should retain their init system – which goes along with “upgrades should not change the sy‐ sytem state” generall – as much as possible. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. It would be totally unacceptable to waste the time of every Debian user with pointless advertisement. I actually have to agree here. bye, //mirabilos -- Yes, I hate users and I want them to suffer. -- Marco d'Itri on gmane.linux.debian.devel.general -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.11.1411281511270.10...@tglase.lan.tarent.de
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
Hi, Simon Richter: I have a system where the network connection is so important that the pppd is invoked via the inittab, which is a published interface of the init system and has been for decades. When an upgrade installs systemd, this machine will simply drop off the network. Other systems I have have serial consoles only, also configured via inittab. Installing systemd there will lock me out. Non-standard inittab entries should surely be displayed and warned about, but IMHO that's not sufficient reason to not switch the other 99.99% who never touched their inittab. -- -- Matthias Urlichs signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On 11/28/2014 03:16 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Marco d'Itri wrote: I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the system administrator chooses otherwise. I disagree with you, and so does CTTE, this time: they said that existing installations should retain their init system – which goes along with “upgrades should not change the sy‐ sytem state” generall – as much as possible. No, the ctte did not say that. We had a flamewar about that interpretation before. Ansgar -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5478853d.3010...@debian.org
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: No, the ctte did not say that. We had a flamewar about that interpretation before. That was almost word by word from https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg0.html bye, //mirabilos -- Why don't you use JavaScript? I also don't like enabling JavaScript in Because I use lynx as browser. +1 -- Octavio Alvarez, me and ⡍⠁⠗⠊⠕ (Mario Lang) on debian-devel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.11.1411281523530.10...@tglase.lan.tarent.de
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 02:41:23PM +0100, Marco d'Itri wrote: On Nov 28, Svante Signell svante.sign...@gmail.com wrote: a) Upgrades should _not_ change init: whatever is installed should be kept. I disagree: upgrades should get the default init system unless the system administrator chooses otherwise. Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed the default syslog. The grub1 bootloader was not replaced when Debian changed to grub2. If Debian changed from exim to postfix the existing MTA would not be changed. So keep your hands of the init system on upgrades. b) New installs should get systemd-sysv as default init with a debconf message about alternative init systems. It would be totally unacceptable to waste the time of every Debian user with pointless advertisement. This question could be part of the expert menu. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html | signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On 11/28/2014 03:24 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: No, the ctte did not say that. We had a flamewar about that interpretation before. That was almost word by word from https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg0.html See [1] and [2] and possibly other places. Ansgar [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/11/msg00046.html [2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-ctte/2014/11/msg00049.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/547886a1.6090...@debian.org
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 03:24:18PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Ansgar Burchardt wrote: No, the ctte did not say that. We had a flamewar about that interpretation before. That was almost word by word from https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2014/11/msg0.html Hi Thorsten, I think you may be misreading the text there. They /did not/ say that the init system should not be switched. I'll try a simplified version of the resolution below. 0) This is advice, it's non-binding. 1) The previous resolution was silent on automatic switching. 2) We've been asked to decide about automatic switching and... 3) We don't want to decide this while there's a GR going on. 4) Please propose changes which would make new installations get systemd, and upgrades retain existing init so that... 5) We can decide what to do after the GR is over. Hope this clarifies. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141128143245.go17...@halon.org.uk
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Nov 28, Simon Richter s...@debian.org wrote: I disagree: This is not safe and can break systems. Everything is not safe and can break systems, so this is not a very compelling argument. I have a system where the network connection is so important that the pppd is invoked via the inittab, which is a published interface of the init system and has been for decades. When an upgrade installs systemd, this machine will simply drop off the network. I want to warn about non-standard inittab entries with a debconf notice, but I have not started working on it yet. -- ciao, Marco pgplQ47iFnvR9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote: Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed the default syslog. Note that syslog-ng was not the default, but sysklogd (which was) wasn’t replaced either. Thankfully. The grub1 bootloader was not replaced when Debian changed to grub2. Actually, it was, unless you installed the fresh “grub-legacy” package before upgrading, which was mostly a no-op though. And forgetting to do so *did* hose some obscure systems. So, the GRUB 0.x → GRUB2 change is actually a g̲o̲o̲d̲ example of why the init system ought to be kept on upgrade. I’ve attached the company-internal documentation (minus one person name) of the process I used to upgrade virtually all of our lenny machines straight to wheezy (we mostly skipped squeeze altogether). It’s MediaWiki syntax. It’s German but you’ll get rough ideas, enough LC_ALL=C dpkg/apt in there. bye, //mirabilos -- tarent solutions GmbH Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/ Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235 HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg= Debian Lenny → Wheezy Upgrade = [[Category:HowTos]] sudo su - exec mksh -l == Vorab zu prüfen == Wenn irgendwelche Software händisch installiert ist, die Python 2.6 braucht, abbrechen oder vorher sicherstellen, daß die Software hinterher mit Python 2.7 ⓐ noch läuft und ⓑ man die auch dagegen neukompilieren und installieren kann! == Sicherstellen, daß das lenny komplett up-to-date ist == * '''Mindestens einen 2.6.32 Kernel, ggfs. aus lenny-backports, booten!''' * Nachgucken, welche PostgreSQL-Version(en) installiert und/oder aktiv sind. * System aktualisieren und aufräumen: agus apt-get --purge dist-upgrade apt-get --purge autoremove apt-get --purge clean dpkg --audit Gern auch „von Hand“ mit '''dselect''' interaktiv. == ggfs. Pakete auf „hold“ setzen == for x in mailman; do print $x hold; done | dpkg --set-selections == squeeze sources.list draufkopieren == Je nach Location (extern vs. im tarent-Netz): * admin/unix/sources.list/squeeze * admin/unix/sources.list/squeeze.tarent Die '''/etc/apt/sources.list''' hierdurch ersetzen. Alle lokalen Anpassungen sind eh’ in '''/etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list'''. Außerdem die /etc/apt/preferences und ggfs. /etc/apt/preferences.d/** leeren/reviewen. == dpkg aktualisieren, grub-legacy beibehalten, apt-listbugs entfernen == apt-listbugs entfernen – es geht während des Upgrades von squeeze auf wheezy zwischendrin kaputt, weil seine Dependencies nicht korrekt sind und die Ruby 1.8 → 1.9.1(really-1.9.3) Migration im Weg ist. Außerdem nervt das eh immer nur. agus apt-get --purge install dpkg apt-listbugs- grub- grub-legacy == apt aktualisieren == Potentiell ein bißchen tricky, durch einen Bug in APT selber. apt-get --purge install apt agus Wenn das nicht klappt: apt-get --purge install apt -o APT::Immediate-Configure=no agus == System temporär auf squeeze heben == Potentiell ein bißchen tricky, durch einen Bug in APT selber. apt-get --purge dist-upgrade Falls Fehler auftreten, iterativ so lösen: * E: Could not perform immediate configuration on 'perl'. Please see man 5 apt.conf under APT::Immediate-Configure for details. (2) * E: Could not perform immediate configuration on 'perl-modules'. Please see man 5 apt.conf under APT::Immediate-Configure for details. (2) apt-get --purge install perl -o APT::Immediate-Configure=no apt-get --purge dist-upgrade * E: Could not perform immediate configuration on 'g++-4.4'. Please see man 5 apt.conf under APT::Immediate-Configure for details. (2) apt-get --purge install build-essential -o APT::Immediate-Configure=no apt-get --purge dist-upgrade == Platz schaffen == '''Achtung:''' (hier noch) keine postgresql-* Pakete von „autoremove“ entfernen lassen! apt-get --purge autoremove apt-get --purge clean == ggfs. Pakete auf „hold“ setzen == ''(wo nötig, Beispiel siehe oben)'' == wheezy sources.list draufkopieren == Je nach Location (extern vs. im tarent-Netz): * admin/unix/sources.list/wheezy * admin/unix/sources.list/wheezy.tarent Die '''/etc/apt/sources.list''' ersetzen. Alle lokalen Anpassungen sind eh’ in '''/etc/apt/sources.list.d/*.list'''. Außerdem ''erneut'' die /etc/apt/preferences und ggfs. /etc/apt/preferences.d/** leeren/reviewen (da tarent-server für squeeze sie noch mit Leben füllen könnte). == tar und danach(!) dpkg aktualisieren === agus apt-get --purge install tar apt-get --purge install dpkg dpkg --audit Manchmal mag dpkg nicht, das sieht dann so aus: The following packages have unmet dependencies: libc6-dev : Breaks: gcc-4.4 ( 4.4.6-4) but 4.4.5-8 is to be installed E: Broken packages Demfalls hilft i.d.R. ein Entfernen von gcc-4.4 (braucht das noch wer? in wheezy nichtmals m68k…): apt-get --purge install dpkg gcc-4.4-base- -o APT::Immediate-Configure=no dpkg --audit gcc-4.3
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:00:42PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote: Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed the default syslog. Note that syslog-ng was not the default, but sysklogd (which was) wasn’t replaced either. Thankfully. Are you sure that we didn’t have syslog-ng between sysklogd and rsyslog? I’m getting old… The grub1 bootloader was not replaced when Debian changed to grub2. Actually, it was, unless you installed the fresh “grub-legacy” package before upgrading, which was mostly a no-op though. And forgetting to do so *did* hose some obscure systems. Hm, I got the info that a new menu entry was added to the grub1 menu to chainload into grub2 (not the boot default). After some testing you had to enter a command to install the grub2 bootloader. Without it grub1 was active with its menu.lst. Shade and sweet water! Stephan -- | Stephan Seitz E-Mail: s...@fsing.rootsland.net | | Public Keys: http://fsing.rootsland.net/~stse/keys.html | smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote: On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 04:00:42PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Stephan Seitz wrote: Of course not. syslog-ng was not replaced by rsyslog when Debian changed the default syslog. Note that syslog-ng was not the default, but sysklogd (which was) wasn’t replaced either. Thankfully. Are you sure that we didn’t have syslog-ng between sysklogd and rsyslog? I’m Yes. Although, for most use cases, they’re both too bloated. On Guillem’s recommendation I’ve switched to inetutils-syslogd now, and like it so far. When sending to a logserver, you have to enable that in /etc/default/inetutils-syslogd (for security reasons), and the logserver can then be e.g. an rsyslogd with all of its advanced functionality. bye, //mirabilos -- tarent solutions GmbH Rochusstraße 2-4, D-53123 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/ Tel: +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235 HRB 5168 (AG Bonn) • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941 Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/alpine.deb.2.11.1411281636390.10...@tglase.lan.tarent.de
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
Matthias Urlichs matth...@urlichs.de writes: Non-standard inittab entries should surely be displayed and warned about, but IMHO that's not sufficient reason to not switch the other 99.99% who never touched their inittab. In the server world, I'm pretty sure you are significantly underestimating the number of systems with a custom inittab, although automatic handling of all the various ways to spawn a useful serial console would cut down the numbers somewhat. But we're pretty late in the release cycle to do enough analysis to try to figure out what those all are. (Where I've worked, this has always been custom, replacing /etc/inittab with a local configuration file, so the analysis isn't trivial.) -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/8761dzf9qh@hope.eyrie.org
Re: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Am 28.11.2014 15:55, schrieb Marco d'Itri: I have a system where the network connection is so important that the pppd is invoked via the inittab, which is a published interface of the init system and has been for decades. When an upgrade installs systemd, this machine will simply drop off the network. I want to warn about non-standard inittab entries with a debconf notice, but I have not started working on it yet. Excellent, thank you! Simon -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1 iJwEAQECAAYFAlR40l0ACgkQ0sfeulffv7tV1gP/SByNCzmUNh6N0i8C/3aW9Ziq F2jq7uKuDfNjOa/VlIcj2TPNP4phDyPgEChu6yzstfIutwOOCYbfip72T829anQ2 cixkAKm8cOkbfXHcdPzZZ5g8t2p0+oo0lvA/ixXpj2HFgY6uoTQEXtzlf7gJzfjj oZWVokDS5awd3zICa1Q= =h93B -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5478d25f.8030...@debian.org
