Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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
Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
Hi Steve, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes: 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. How can someone be switched to systemd on a fresh install? If you were pointing out an instance where upgrades could bite users, that would be different, and might well be an RC bug. Apparently however, you're talking about the installer, which has nothing to do with upgrades, so cannot result in anything being switched (well, not unless you're saying that the person is being switched from being one sort of user to another, and might find that a bad experience ... but then I've no idea what the appropriate steps might be ;-) ) Cheers, Phil. P.S. For those that think there's no choice when installing: https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd I'd suggest that anyone that knows enough to have an opinion about their preferred init will be able to manage that simple extra step with ease. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] HANDS.COM Ltd. |-| http://www.hands.com/http://ftp.uk.debian.org/ |(| Hugo-Klemm-Strasse 34, 21075 Hamburg,GERMANY pgpOf_kblZkzj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie (lendows 1)
Hi, Philip Hands: P.S. For those that think there's no choice when installing: https://wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd I'd suggest that anyone that knows enough to have an opinion about their preferred init will be able to manage that simple extra step with ease. +1 One might apply the same argument to upgrading … (assuming that the not-yet-implemented warnings, re inittab/fstab/runlevels, do not trigger) -- -- Matthias Urlichs signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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 pgpxwIg552ZMV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: 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
Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
]] Svante Signell [...] 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) That would require changes to a number of packages to ensure they end up installing the default init. (vmdebootstrap, ganeti, fai at least comes to mind). I think it would also be crazy for debootstrap to end up installing a non-default init by default. Arguably, debootstrap could be taught not to install an init at all, but that tool will require adjusting all those other ways of installing Debian as well as a good bunch of testing to ensure nothing breaks. I don't think that would be appropriate at this stage of the freeze. -- Tollef Fog Heen UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: Summary:Re: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Fri, 28 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote: And according to https://bugs.debian.org/762194 with preliminary results in https://bugs.debian.org/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 This message (#142) indicates that switching the dependency order will change what debootstrap installs by default. This isn't acceptable, even if we were to override the decision of the maintainers of the init package to install systemd-sysv by default on upgrades. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Everyone has to die. And in a hundred years nobody's going to inquire just how most people died. The best thing is to do it in the way that strikes your fancy most. -- Kenzaburō Ōe _Silent Cry_ p5 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
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. 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. 2) In case you missed doing the above, you get a debconf prompt when No, no, no, no, no, no, no! Again: aborting the dist-upgrade in the debconf of one package may leave the system an ugly mess, especially if you don’t preconfigure packages. The linux-image-* check in their prerm for an attempt to remove the running kernel. Even that is borderline, and only somewhat acceptable because you would not normally do that during a dist-upgrade. This is not “suboptimal”, this invites not just new bugs but new classes of bugs. Recovering the system after that is going to be hell. One thing you *could* do is a debconf warning (just a message!) after the switch to systemd, to tell users to switch back manually *before* rebooting (for these cases where e.g. systemd is incompatible with the SoC’s 2.6 kernel you absolutely must run). Does that work, anyway (i.e. does installing systemd and immediately reverting to sysvinit leave the system net unchanged, modulo the dependencies it pulls in (see planet post))? 3) Heavily advertise (again in release notes?) that you need to install sysvinit-core and add the pinning file _before_ dist-upgrading. As I said, this should be a given. Note that the only technical in the above is the creation of a debconf prompt in pre/post-inst of the init package. All the rest is just a matter of writing. Right, and I believe that a debconf *message* is appropriate, but a *prompt* with a choice to abort the upgrade is wrong. bye, //mirabilos -- Just a user… -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 09:56 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote: 2) In case you missed doing the above, you get a debconf prompt when No, no, no, no, no, no, no! Again: aborting the dist-upgrade in the debconf of one package may leave the system an ugly mess, especially if you don’t preconfigure packages. I did _not_ propose aborting the dist-upgrade here. Sorry for not being clear enough. The proposed debconf prompt is just for information: hit return to continue -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 09:56 +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote: On Tue, 25 Nov 2014, Svante Signell wrote: Does that work, anyway (i.e. does installing systemd and immediately reverting to sysvinit leave the system net unchanged, modulo the dependencies it pulls in (see planet post))? I've installed testing (basic install) on a new box and immediately after first reboot installed sysvinit-core. That worked for me, but as written before, it can create problems for people having different preferences set. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
Hi, On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:29:28PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: 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. 3) Heavily advertise (again in release notes?) that you need to install sysvinit-core and add the pinning file _before_ dist-upgrading. See https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/issues.dbk?view=markup lines 170 to 223. Are you after something different? How about raising a bug against the release-notes package before asking tech-ctte to do something? Note that the only technical in the above is the creation of a debconf prompt in pre/post-inst of the init package. All the rest is just a matter of writing. Alternatively: The only hard bit of the above is the creation of the release notes. All the rest is just a matter of coding. Neil -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#765803: Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 14:46 +, Neil McGovern wrote: Hi, On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:29:28PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: 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. 3) Heavily advertise (again in release notes?) that you need to install sysvinit-core and add the pinning file _before_ dist-upgrading. See https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/issues.dbk?view=markup lines 170 to 223. Are you after something different? How about raising a bug against the release-notes package before asking tech-ctte to do something? Is it possible to get access to edit those pages? By filing a bug against release-notes? Note that the only technical in the above is the creation of a debconf prompt in pre/post-inst of the init package. All the rest is just a matter of writing. To clarify: debconf prompt - debconf message, meaning that the install is not to be aborted, only an informal message is written and hit CR to continue. Is it possible to propose a text here? Alternatively: The only hard bit of the above is the creation of the release notes. All the rest is just a matter of coding. YMMV -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 04:23:19PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: On Wed, 2014-11-26 at 14:46 +, Neil McGovern wrote: Hi, On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:29:28PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote: 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. 3) Heavily advertise (again in release notes?) that you need to install sysvinit-core and add the pinning file _before_ dist-upgrading. See https://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/ddp/manuals/trunk/release-notes/en/issues.dbk?view=markup lines 170 to 223. Are you after something different? How about raising a bug against the release-notes package before asking tech-ctte to do something? Is it possible to get access to edit those pages? By filing a bug against release-notes? https://www.debian.org/doc/cvs, though I suggest a patch would probably be better, and that should be a bug against release-notes. Note that the only technical in the above is the creation of a debconf prompt in pre/post-inst of the init package. All the rest is just a matter of writing. To clarify: debconf prompt - debconf message, meaning that the install is not to be aborted, only an informal message is written and hit CR to continue. Is it possible to propose a text here? Alternatively: The only hard bit of the above is the creation of the release notes. All the rest is just a matter of coding. Indeed, my point was that 'just writing text' doesn't mean it happens - we've traditionally been very understaffed in that bit of the project. Neil -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#762194: Proposal for upgrades to jessie
Hello, Below is a proposal for a (partial) solution for the upgrade problem of keeping the installed init system: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=765803 This has been discussed privately among selected users/DM/DDs and since the deadline for the ctte is December 4, it has to be known to them (and -devel for comments). (another partial? solution is to change order of the (pre-)depends of the init package, as proposed in 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) 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. 2) In case you missed doing the above, you get a debconf prompt when installing the init package that if you want to keep sysv/openrc/etc continue with the installation, get systemd-sysv installed and after that install sysvinit-core and do the pinning. (This is suboptimal, many peoples systems could be broken at first reboot, we will find out in due time). Another issue is upgrading from testing/sid?/etc (different status) to jessie: 3) Heavily advertise (again in release notes?) that you need to install sysvinit-core and add the pinning file _before_ dist-upgrading. Note that the only technical in the above is the creation of a debconf prompt in pre/post-inst of the init package. All the rest is just a matter of writing. Sincerely! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
