Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Nikolaus Rath wrote: > Don Armstrong writes: > > 4. The CTTE appreciates the effort of Debian contributors to mitigate > >any issues with the transition by: > > > >a) Providing a fallback boot entry for sysvinit when systemd is the > >default init in grub (#757298) > > > >b) Developing a mechanism to warn on non-standard inittab > >configurations which are unsupported in systemd. > > Does this deliberately say just inittab instead of something like > "non-compatible configurations"? Yes. > I believe (and hope) that similar mechanism are planned in particular > for fstab and crypttab. It would be awesome if they are; I'd like to point to specific bugs for these if you're aware of them. [My motivation here is to try to get people who have these kinds of setups to participate in those bugs.] -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Our days are precious, but we gladly see them going If in their place we find a thing more precious growing A rare, exotic plant, our gardener's heart delighting A child whom we are teaching, a booklet we are writing -- Frederick Rükert _Wisdom of the Brahmans_ [Hermann Hesse _Glass Bead Game_] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141211045305.gt12...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
Don Armstrong writes: > 4. The CTTE appreciates the effort of Debian contributors to mitigate >any issues with the transition by: > >a) Providing a fallback boot entry for sysvinit when systemd is the >default init in grub (#757298) > >b) Developing a mechanism to warn on non-standard inittab >configurations which are unsupported in systemd. Does this deliberately say just inittab instead of something like "non-compatible configurations"? I believe (and hope) that similar mechanism are planned in particular for fstab and crypttab. Best, -Nikolaus -- GPG encrypted emails preferred. Key id: 0xD113FCAC3C4E599F Fingerprint: ED31 791B 2C5C 1613 AF38 8B8A D113 FCAC 3C4E 599F »Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a Banana.« -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87zjauyfqk@vostro.rath.org
Bug#770789: Draft of option for #770789
On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 09:13:30AM -0800, Don Armstrong wrote: > This is just a draft: > ==BEGIN== > In 770789, the Technical Committee was asked to override the decision > of upstream and the maintainer of df to not include i in the units > output when asked for IEC output (2^10). > The CTTE declines to override the decision of the maintainer and > upstream. > ==END== > I suspect the options to be [A] Decline to override and [FD]. Does > anyone object to proceeding? [If there are no objections from CTTE > members or DDs, I will call for votes in 48 hours.] No objection. -- 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 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
Thanks for the updates; the current version in debian-ctte git (as of commit e43bfb9cd1f6316ed01a58a4a248e82fc3825850) looks good to me. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141211021109.GA31561@thin
Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Josh Triplett wrote: > I'd used "the Technical Committee considered" rather intentionally in > the wording I suggested, to avoid any of the controversy around "was > asked" from the previous last decision. Not going to push for that, > just pointing it out as intentional. We really were asked, as the CTTE itself doesn't decide to consider something. I've tweaked the wording slightly. > While it's a bit of a nitpick, the transition plan involves more than > just the init package The groundwork for it was already there thanks to Steve's work; the transition plan was really just the init package. But since it doesn't hurt anything, modified. > I'd suggested clarifying that this applies to both upgraded systems > and new installs. Thoughts on that clarification? Sure; it seems obvious to me, but since it's what I mean, clarified. > Typo: s/swithc/switch/ Fixed, thanks. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Who is thinking this? I am. -- Greg Egan _Diaspora_ p38 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141211010727.gr12...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 14:35:32 -0800 Don Armstrong wrote: > On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Josh Triplett wrote: > > This doesn't seem like an accurate description of #762194. #762194 was > > not specificlaly a request for the TC to override the maintainers of > > "init" to change the alternative order. > > Well, more specifically, it was to override the transition plan (namely, > to transition installs to systemd by default upon upgrade) which the > maintainers of the init package had already proposed and implemented. Fair enough. I just didn't want the statement to reference any specific technical proposal for doing so, especially when not advocating that proposal (and not incorporating the additional changes that such a proposal would require, such as to debootstrap or d-i). > I've clarified this, and adopted the other changes: > > In #762194, the Technical Committee was asked to use its power under > §6.1.4 to override the transition plan of the init package maintainers > to have both new installs and upgrades use systemd by default. I'd used "the Technical Committee considered" rather intentionally in the wording I suggested, to avoid any of the controversy around "was asked" from the previous last decision. Not going to push for that, just pointing it out as intentional. > 1. The CTTE determined in #727708 that systemd should be the default >init system in Debian. > > 2. In https://lists.debian.org/87mwc9gfsw@xoog.err.no, the >maintainers of the init package announced their transition plan for >migrating to systemd as the default init system on both installs >and new upgrades. > > 3. The init package currently in jessie implements this transition. While it's a bit of a nitpick, the transition plan involves more than just the init package; it also includes the sysvinit packages (sysvinit and sysvinit-core). Perhaps s/package/packages/ (and s/implements/implement/), since "init packages" logically includes sysvinit, systemd, and other init system packages? > ==OPTION A== > > Using its power under §6.1.5 to make statements: > > 3. The CTTE affirms the decision of the init system package >maintainers to transition to systemd by default. I'd suggested clarifying that this applies to both upgraded systems and new installs. Thoughts on that clarification? (Given that this additional TC deliberation and statement occurred specifically because the original decision in #727708 did not specify upgrades versus new installs, spelling that out explictly in the statement and not just in the frontmatter seems preferable.) > 4. The CTTE appreciates the effort of Debian contributors to mitigate >any issues with the transition by: > >a) Providing a fallback boot entry for sysvinit when systemd is the >default init in grub (#757298) > >b) Developing a mechanism to warn on inittab configurations which >are unsupported in systemd. (#761063) > >c) Providing documentation on how to remain with sysvinit on >upgrades and swithc to sysvinit upon installation. Typo: s/swithc/switch/ >d) Numerous bug reports and fixes by contributors who have tested >the systemd migration in their configurations. > > 5. The CTTE advises (without overriding any Debian contributor, >maintainer, or team) that any such mitigations should be included >in jessie, to ensure a smooth transition for Debian users. Thank you for adding this. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141211000545.GA30153@thin
Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Josh Triplett wrote: > This doesn't seem like an accurate description of #762194. #762194 was > not specificlaly a request for the TC to override the maintainers of > "init" to change the alternative order. Well, more specifically, it was to override the transition plan (namely, to transition installs to systemd by default upon upgrade) which the maintainers of the init package had already proposed and implemented. I've clarified this, and adopted the other changes: In #762194, the Technical Committee was asked to use its power under §6.1.4 to override the transition plan of the init package maintainers to have both new installs and upgrades use systemd by default. 1. The CTTE determined in #727708 that systemd should be the default init system in Debian. 2. In https://lists.debian.org/87mwc9gfsw@xoog.err.no, the maintainers of the init package announced their transition plan for migrating to systemd as the default init system on both installs and new upgrades. 3. The init package currently in jessie implements this transition. ==OPTION A== Using its power under §6.1.5 to make statements: 3. The CTTE affirms the decision of the init system package maintainers to transition to systemd by default. 4. The CTTE appreciates the effort of Debian contributors to mitigate any issues with the transition by: a) Providing a fallback boot entry for sysvinit when systemd is the default init in grub (#757298) b) Developing a mechanism to warn on inittab configurations which are unsupported in systemd. (#761063) c) Providing documentation on how to remain with sysvinit on upgrades and swithc to sysvinit upon installation. d) Numerous bug reports and fixes by contributors who have tested the systemd migration in their configurations. 5. The CTTE advises (without overriding any Debian contributor, maintainer, or team) that any such mitigations should be included in jessie, to ensure a smooth transition for Debian users. -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com "Ban cryptography! Yes. Let's also ban pencils, pens and paper, since criminals can use them to draw plans of the joint they are casing or even, god forbid, create one time pads to pass uncrackable codes to each other. Ban open spaces since criminals could use them to converse with each other out of earshot of the police. Let's ban flags since they could be used to pass secret messages in semaphore. In fact let's just ban all forms of verbal and non-verbal communication -- let's see those criminals make plans now!" -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141210223532.go12...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 11:10:10 -0800 Don Armstrong wrote: > I've attached below an initial draft of an option for #762194 for > discussion. A few comments below. > ==BEGIN== > > In #762194, the Technical Committee was asked to use its power under > §6.1.4 to override the decision of the init package maintainers to > depend on systemd-sysv as the first alternative dependency, thus > ensuring both new installs and upgrades use systemd by default. This doesn't seem like an accurate description of #762194. #762194 was not specificlaly a request for the TC to override the maintainers of "init" to change the alternative order. The TC was more generally debating whether the switch to systemd as the default included a switch of existing systems to systemd, and if not, how to only switch for new systems and not for upgrades (for which the TC solicited proposals). Changing the init package dependencies (and changing debootstrap, d-i, etc to install systemd-sysv for new installs) was one possible implementation of the latter. Here's an opening paragraph that seems clearer to me about the overall purpose of the bug report and this statement: """ In #762194, the Technical Committee considered whether upgrades of existing systems should continue to switch to systemd by default, or retain their init system (with only new installs getting systemd by default). """ > 1. The CTTE determined in #727708 that systemd should be the default >init system in Debian. > > 2. In <87mwc9gfsw@xoog.err.no>[1], the maintainers of the init >package announced their transition plan for migrating to systemd as >the default init system on both installs and new upgrades. Possible addition, for clarity: "The packages in jessie implement this transition plan." > ==OPTION A== > > Using its power under §6.1.5 to make statements: > > 3. The CTTE affirms the decision of the init system package >maintainers to transition to systemd by default. For clarity: "to transition upgraded systems to systemd by default, not just new installs." > 4. The CTTE appreciates the effort of Debian contributors to mitigate >any issues with the transition by: > >a) Providing a fallback boot entry for sysvinit when systemd is the >default init in grub (#757298) > >b) Developing a mechanism to warn on non-standard inittab >configurations which are unsupported in systemd. I would change this from "non-standard inittab configurations" to "uses of /etc/inittab". They're not non-standard; it's not incredibly common to modify inittab to launch services or add consoles, but it's not by any means non-standard. I don't want to see anyone (such as a sysadmin of a system with such a configuration) taking this TC statement as a comment on the appropriateness of such inittab configuration. Also, you might want to include a link here. The mechanism was being developed in a thread in #765803, but that's not the subject of that bug, and that bug doesn't seem like the right place for it. Thus, I've re-posted the WIP code to a systemd bug, #761063. >c) Providing documentation on how to opt to remain with sysvinit on >both initial installs and upgrades. Nitpick: "on how to opt to remain with sysvinit on upgrades, or switch to sysvinit for new installs". (Also, "how to opt to remain with" seems awkward; perhaps "how to keep using"?) >d) Numerous bug reports and fixes by contributors who have tested >the systemd migration in their configurations. One potential addition: 5. The CTTE advises (without overriding any Debian contributor, maintainer, or team) that any such mitigations should be included in jessie, to ensure a smooth transition for Debian users. (Since neither (a) nor (b) above has actually made it into jessie, or unstable for that matter.) That said, such advice may be unnecessary and superfluous; I'd hope that's already the plan. > 1: https://lists.debian.org/87mwc9gfsw@xoog.err.no I would suggest inlining this reference in the relevant paragraph, or at least making it a footnote right after that paragraph, rather than an endnote. - Josh Triplett -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141210204852.GA26649@thin
Bug#762194: Initial draft of affirming transition to systemd as default for #762194
I've attached below an initial draft of an option for #762194 for discussion. Steve indicated that he wanted to revise/contribute to this option, so I don't believe we should call for votes until that happens. ==BEGIN== In #762194, the Technical Committee was asked to use its power under §6.1.4 to override the decision of the init package maintainers to depend on systemd-sysv as the first alternative dependency, thus ensuring both new installs and upgrades use systemd by default. 1. The CTTE determined in #727708 that systemd should be the default init system in Debian. 2. In <87mwc9gfsw@xoog.err.no>[1], the maintainers of the init package announced their transition plan for migrating to systemd as the default init system on both installs and new upgrades. ==OPTION A== Using its power under §6.1.5 to make statements: 3. The CTTE affirms the decision of the init system package maintainers to transition to systemd by default. 4. The CTTE appreciates the effort of Debian contributors to mitigate any issues with the transition by: a) Providing a fallback boot entry for sysvinit when systemd is the default init in grub (#757298) b) Developing a mechanism to warn on non-standard inittab configurations which are unsupported in systemd. c) Providing documentation on how to opt to remain with sysvinit on both initial installs and upgrades. d) Numerous bug reports and fixes by contributors who have tested the systemd migration in their configurations. 1: https://lists.debian.org/87mwc9gfsw@xoog.err.no ==END== -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me. -- Emo Philips. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141210191010.gj12...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Bug#770789: Draft of option for #770789
This is just a draft: ==BEGIN== In 770789, the Technical Committee was asked to override the decision of upstream and the maintainer of df to not include i in the units output when asked for IEC output (2^10). The CTTE declines to override the decision of the maintainer and upstream. ==END== I suspect the options to be [A] Decline to override and [FD]. Does anyone object to proceeding? [If there are no objections from CTTE members or DDs, I will call for votes in 48 hours.] -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com A people living under the perpetual menace of war and invasion is very easy to govern. It demands no social reforms. It does not haggle over expenditures on armaments and military equipment. It pays without discussion, it ruins itself, and that is an excellent thing for the syndicates of financiers and manufacturers for whom patriotic terrors are an abundant source of gain. -- Anatole France -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141210171330.gi12...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
