Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On 30/12/2019 21:53, fsmithred via Dng wrote: On 12/29/19 10:46 PM, tom wrote: I know Devuan has been pretty much more or less 'to create a binary compatible Debian but without systemd', but at what point would it be determined that the best course of action may be to leave Debian behind and continue our own way? Probably won't happen any time soon due to manpower issues but it's worth thinking about. One way to measure that might be to see if we start falling farther behind debian. Right now, we're still catching up. Jessie was 2 years late. Ascii was 1 year late. Beowulf is 6 months late. Measured against any government contract work, this could only be called hugely positive in terms of progress and catching up! Any talk of switching our base is premature. fsmithred ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On 28/12/2019 15:26, Clarke Sideroad via Dng wrote:
On 2019-12-28 5:03 a.m., Alexis PM via Dng wrote:
My comments:
A mediocre result, neither good nor bad.
The best option for people who don't want to use systemd, Option 6
"E: Support for multiple init systems is Required", came in last.
But Option 1 "F: Focus on systemd" came in second place, if it had
won it would have been a tragedy.
We remain more or less as we are ("The Debian project recognizes that
systemd service units are the preferred configuration", "Packages may
include support for alternate init systems besides systemd and may
include alternatives for any systemd-specific interfaces they use",
"Maintainers use their normal procedures for deciding which patches
to include", "Debian is committed to working with derivatives that
make different choices about init systems" as a simple
recommendation), now with the certainty that it will remain so for at
least some time. A project offering Debian packages free of systemd
dependencies remains necessary.
It looks like the mess that exists, continues to exist unabated and
will only get worse over time.
Debian has really lost its reason for being, which differentiated it
from other distros.
The strength and safety of Dev level decision making in Debian and
loss of sight of its history has turned out to be the weakness.
In several ways it looks like world politics.
The lure of continuing to use Debian as a base distro is still there,
the breadth of the repos and the freedom and strength of individual
developers remains.
This all further reinforces, now more than ever the need for Devuan.
Yes there are other non-systemd Linux choices out there, but for me
the Devuan, Debian based combination will continue to be the best
choice for general use.
Clarke
Well said, Sir!
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 14:38:53 -0800 spiralofhope wrote: > On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 13:46:12 -0500 > Steve Litt wrote: > > > What happens if Debian stops supporting sysvinit, or worse, installs > > Halloween Code to greatly complicate systemd replacement? > > I wasn't familiar with the term "Halloween Code". Is this a reference > to Microsoft's internal strategy memorandums? > > https://www.gnu.org/software/fsfe/projects/ms-vs-eu/halloween1.html > https://www.gnu.org/software/fsfe/projects/ms-vs-eu/halloween2.html Looking further, I find the correct term is "AARD Code". It's the code Microsoft put in Windows to error out if Wind3x was run under DR-DOS instead of MS-DOS. DR-DOS was perfectly capable of running Windows, but Microsoft wanted to sell DOS, so they put an error message if DR-DOS was detected. Systemd itself is AARD Code: Whether intentional or not it prevents use of competing software. I believe that AARD code was discussed in one of the Halloween Documents. SteveT Steve Litt December 2019 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21 ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 13:46:12 -0500 Steve Litt wrote: > What happens if Debian stops supporting sysvinit, or worse, installs > Halloween Code to greatly complicate systemd replacement? I wasn't familiar with the term "Halloween Code". Is this a reference to Microsoft's internal strategy memorandums? https://www.gnu.org/software/fsfe/projects/ms-vs-eu/halloween1.html https://www.gnu.org/software/fsfe/projects/ms-vs-eu/halloween2.html ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
Switching base is not possible so long as people like me don't contribute to the development. So, it is not an option. Maybe when enough people jump in and start helping the current current developers it could be done. From my point of view, as a sysadmin, Jessie being 2 years late was no biggie, because when I moved to Devuan Jessie (from Debian Wheezy), I had a working system I could depend on. Having the latest and greatest is fine for workstations. For servers, I want stable and bulletproof. Rod On 12/30/2019 03:53 PM, fsmithred via Dng wrote: > On 12/29/19 10:46 PM, tom wrote: >> >> I know Devuan has been pretty much more or less 'to create a binary >> compatible Debian but without systemd', but at what point would it be >> determined that the best course of action may be to leave Debian behind >> and continue our own way? Probably won't happen any time soon due to >> manpower issues but it's worth thinking about. >> > > One way to measure that might be to see if we start falling farther > behind debian. Right now, we're still catching up. > > Jessie was 2 years late. > Ascii was 1 year late. > Beowulf is 6 months late. > > Any talk of switching our base is premature. > > fsmithred > ___ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng -- Rod Rodolico Daily Data, Inc. POB 140465 Dallas TX 75214-0465 US http://dailydata.net 214.827.2170 ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
>Many years ago, on this mailing list, one of the VUAs mentioned that >the long term plan was to leave Debian behind and become the Devuan >independent distro. I am sorry to burst the soap bubble, I want Devuan to persist and that requires a realistic analysis. Cleaning up systemd dependencies to Debian packaging is child's play compared to creating and maintaining a large self-built distro in the long run. The idea of an independent Devuan not based on Debian may be the imaginary fantasy of some people (not me), but it is unrealistic. Creating, but more importantly maintaining, a medium or large distro over the years is a huge job. Debian is around 1500 maintainers and it is noticeable that more person-hours would be needed to maintain it (delays in packaging new versions, delays in attending to bug reports, ...). Devuan has 1/100 that number of maintainers, and its human capacity is limited to hardly achieve to modify a small number of packages of each Debian release (task that is delayed months). For experiments there are already other distros, like Hyperbola. If the name of Devuan ended up deriving to a Hyperbola type distro, it would be necessary to remake a new Devuan in the original (current) sense: based on the veteran and stable distro that Debian is but removing the systemd dependencies. Best regards! ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On 12/31/19 7:46 PM, Steve Litt wrote: On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:00:39 + (UTC) Alexis PM via Dng wrote: >Many years ago, on this mailing list, one of the VUAs mentioned that the long term plan was to leave Debian behind and become the Devuan independent distro. I am sorry to burst the soap bubble, I want Devuan to persist and that requires a realistic analysis. Why apologize, and then do it anyway? Cleaning up systemd dependencies to Debian packaging is child's play compared to creating and maintaining a large self-built distro in the long run. [snip several legitimate arguments supporting preceding sentence] A quick look indicates you've been on this list since December 2016. The Vua made this statement well prior to December 2016. Your arguments favoring perpetual tracking of Debian were all excellent. There's exactly one argument favoring an independent Devuan: What happens if Debian stops supporting sysvinit, or worse, installs Halloween Code to greatly complicate systemd replacement? Hi maybe we repackge sysvinit as systemd with a higher version number ? So no cleanup needed. Ciao, Tito SteveT Steve Litt December 2019 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21 ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 17:00:39 + (UTC) Alexis PM via Dng wrote: > >Many years ago, on this mailing list, one of the VUAs mentioned that > >the long term plan was to leave Debian behind and become the Devuan > >independent distro. > > > I am sorry to burst the soap bubble, I want Devuan to persist and > that requires a realistic analysis. Why apologize, and then do it anyway? > Cleaning up systemd dependencies > to Debian packaging is child's play compared to creating and > maintaining a large self-built distro in the long run. [snip several legitimate arguments supporting preceding sentence] A quick look indicates you've been on this list since December 2016. The Vua made this statement well prior to December 2016. Your arguments favoring perpetual tracking of Debian were all excellent. There's exactly one argument favoring an independent Devuan: What happens if Debian stops supporting sysvinit, or worse, installs Halloween Code to greatly complicate systemd replacement? SteveT Steve Litt December 2019 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21 ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
>Many years ago, on this mailing list, one of the VUAs mentioned that >the long term plan was to leave Debian behind and become the Devuan >independent distro. I am sorry to burst the soap bubble, I want Devuan to persist and that requires a realistic analysis. Cleaning up systemd dependencies to Debian packaging is child's play compared to creating and maintaining a large self-built distro in the long run. The idea of an independent Devuan not based on Debian may be the imaginary fantasy of some people (not me), but it is unrealistic. Creating, but more importantly maintaining, a medium or large distro over the years is a huge job. Debian is around 1500 maintainers and it is noticeable that more person-hours would be needed to maintain it (delays in packaging new versions, delays in attending to bug reports, ...). Devuan has 1/100 that number of maintainers, and its human capacity is limited to hardly achieve to modify a small number of packages of each Debian release (task that is delayed months). For experiments there are already other distros, like Hyperbola. If the name of Devuan ended up deriving to a Hyperbola type distro, it would be necessary to remake a new Devuan in the original (current) sense: based on the veteran and stable distro that Debian is but removing the systemd dependencies. Best regards! ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 31/12/19 7:46 am, Steve Litt wrote: > I didn't hear anyone telling people what to do. I heard Tom ask a > question. Tom? I think you meant me ? Cheers A -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgt6ogAKCRCoFmvLt+/i +zjtAQC5pj90GT4Hrv1ep9Tg5VWGL5nxesJiCJvg8dYJIW8Y8gD/cjBHRmS04ark OXBCjSJKPkKGlnJsCWjVwKblY+AJNm4= =bugo -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On 12/29/19 10:46 PM, tom wrote: I know Devuan has been pretty much more or less 'to create a binary compatible Debian but without systemd', but at what point would it be determined that the best course of action may be to leave Debian behind and continue our own way? Probably won't happen any time soon due to manpower issues but it's worth thinking about. One way to measure that might be to see if we start falling farther behind debian. Right now, we're still catching up. Jessie was 2 years late. Ascii was 1 year late. Beowulf is 6 months late. Any talk of switching our base is premature. fsmithred ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On Mon, 30 Dec 2019 15:10:46 +1100 terryc wrote: > On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 23:11:16 +1100 > Andrew McGlashan via Dng wrote: > > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA256 > > > > Hi, > > > > On 28/12/19 9:03 pm, Alexis PM via Dng wrote: > > > A mediocre result, neither good nor bad. The best option for > > > people who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E: Support for > > > multiple init systems is Required", came in last. But Option 1 > > > "F: Focus on systemd" came in second place, if it had won it > > > would have been a tragedy. > > > > It's completely broken when only one group of interested parties > > have the only say; DDs should be ashamed. Another wasted > > opportunity to make things right has been blown and there probably > > won't be any other opportunity afforded ever again :( > > > > Debian needs to somehow find a way to include users (especially > > sysadmins) in a meaningful way in votes of such significance. > > In my experience, when people who do not do the work start telling the > people who do do the work, what to do, many efforts disintigrate. I didn't hear anyone telling people what to do. I heard Tom ask a question. > > As a user, I simply choose which best distribution serves my purpose > and when it ceases to do so, I simply move on as I have in the past. I think most of us have plan B and plan C in case sans-systemd distros go bad or go defunct, but what I'm hearing you say is you think it's bad to provide feedback to the VUAs, and instead will just switch distros. Is that really superior to Tom's question? Many years ago, on this mailing list, one of the VUAs mentioned that the long term plan was to leave Debian behind and become the Devuan independent distro. If I were a mind reader I'd guess that his statement was because he foresaw the possibility of a future Debian corruption like we're seeing today, he believed that continual modification of Debian was not a safe way to perpetuate the creation of Devuan, and eventually wanted to move away from that potential catastrophe. The GR results are at https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/vote_002 . Debian's systemd-complexity voting mechanism is hard to interpret, but two things are fairly clear: 1) The #2 option was to focus on systemd, screw other inits 2) The loser was "Support for multiple inits is required." Under those circumstances, I'd say the Vua who mentioned moving away from Debian eventually was wise and prescient. And given the results of the GR I'd say Tom was asking a question both wise and obvious, not trying to tell anyone what to do. Nothing I've written above is meant to in any way belittle the fact that the Devuan project has too few volunteers and volunteer hours and therefore cannot immediately or perhaps in the near future completely break away from Debian. SteveT Steve Litt December 2019 featured book: Rapid Learning for the 21st Century http://www.troubleshooters.com/rl21 ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 30/12/19 3:10 pm, terryc wrote: > On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 23:11:16 +1100 Andrew McGlashan via Dng > wrote: In my experience, when people who do > not do the work start telling the people who do do the work, what > to do, many efforts disintigrate. Without users, including sysadmins willing to install and support an OS, it's use will disintegrate. It may as well then be a distro just for the DDs and those that don't care about non systemd pollution and/or vandalism. A. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgn+TgAKCRCoFmvLt+/i +8LwAQDWqhzQVkBTLeqXMVjHIKy9EQ6nlr45Q9mGucMi3cwjGQEAl3GHl6TA8MTZ VrhpIB59ktxBfnyzRXDs6ue46WgSxR4= =phNs -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 23:11:16 +1100 Andrew McGlashan via Dng wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hi, > > On 28/12/19 9:03 pm, Alexis PM via Dng wrote: > > A mediocre result, neither good nor bad. The best option for people > > who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E: Support for multiple > > init systems is Required", came in last. But Option 1 "F: Focus on > > systemd" came in second place, if it had won it would have been a > > tragedy. > > It's completely broken when only one group of interested parties have > the only say; DDs should be ashamed. Another wasted opportunity to > make things right has been blown and there probably won't be any other > opportunity afforded ever again :( > > Debian needs to somehow find a way to include users (especially > sysadmins) in a meaningful way in votes of such significance. In my experience, when people who do not do the work start telling the people who do do the work, what to do, many efforts disintigrate. As a user, I simply choose which best distribution serves my purpose and when it ceases to do so, I simply move on as I have in the past. We(6 systems) moved from Debian to Devuan to escape the creeping systemd infection. We also dumped acting as a torrent source for any Debian or systemd distro and took up torrenting devuan. I'm very sure that some systemd free distro will continue and there is also BSD if we tire of rolling our own kernels as we did in the past. ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 23:11:16 +1100 Andrew McGlashan via Dng wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > Hi, > > On 28/12/19 9:03 pm, Alexis PM via Dng wrote: > > A mediocre result, neither good nor bad. The best option for people > > who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E: Support for multiple > > init systems is Required", came in last. But Option 1 "F: Focus on > > systemd" came in second place, if it had won it would have been a > > tragedy. > > It's completely broken when only one group of interested parties have > the only say; DDs should be ashamed. Another wasted opportunity to > make things right has been blown and there probably won't be any other > opportunity afforded ever again :( > > Debian needs to somehow find a way to include users (especially > sysadmins) in a meaningful way in votes of such significance. > > A. > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > > iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgdGXQAKCRCoFmvLt+/i > +z4mAP4x7ateI5rKrp4KelB64iy5prRlmb7C5Dz6/QBaol4FLQEAk3FcV0Poiy+f > dJyq5lOuMZfEk7PvQlZluOU5bUKeeM4= > =oikP > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > ___ > Dng mailing list > Dng@lists.dyne.org > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng I know Devuan has been pretty much more or less 'to create a binary compatible Debian but without systemd', but at what point would it be determined that the best course of action may be to leave Debian behind and continue our own way? Probably won't happen any time soon due to manpower issues but it's worth thinking about. -- ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
On 2019-12-28 5:03 a.m., Alexis PM via Dng wrote:
My comments:
A mediocre result, neither good nor bad.
The best option for people who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E:
Support for multiple init systems is Required", came in last.
But Option 1 "F: Focus on systemd" came in second place, if it had won
it would have been a tragedy.
We remain more or less as we are ("The Debian project recognizes that
systemd service units are the preferred configuration", "Packages may
include support for alternate init systems besides systemd and may
include alternatives for any systemd-specific interfaces they use",
"Maintainers use their normal procedures for deciding which patches to
include", "Debian is committed to working with derivatives that make
different choices about init systems" as a simple recommendation), now
with the certainty that it will remain so for at least some time. A
project offering Debian packages free of systemd dependencies remains
necessary.
It looks like the mess that exists, continues to exist unabated and will
only get worse over time.
Debian has really lost its reason for being, which differentiated it
from other distros.
The strength and safety of Dev level decision making in Debian and loss
of sight of its history has turned out to be the weakness.
In several ways it looks like world politics.
The lure of continuing to use Debian as a base distro is still there,
the breadth of the repos and the freedom and strength of individual
developers remains.
This all further reinforces, now more than ever the need for Devuan.
Yes there are other non-systemd Linux choices out there, but for me the
Devuan, Debian based combination will continue to be the best choice for
general use.
Clarke
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 28/12/19 9:03 pm, Alexis PM via Dng wrote: > A mediocre result, neither good nor bad. The best option for people > who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E: Support for multiple > init systems is Required", came in last. But Option 1 "F: Focus on > systemd" came in second place, if it had won it would have been a > tragedy. It's completely broken when only one group of interested parties have the only say; DDs should be ashamed. Another wasted opportunity to make things right has been blown and there probably won't be any other opportunity afforded ever again :( Debian needs to somehow find a way to include users (especially sysadmins) in a meaningful way in votes of such significance. A. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iHUEAREIAB0WIQTJAoMHtC6YydLfjUOoFmvLt+/i+wUCXgdGXQAKCRCoFmvLt+/i +z4mAP4x7ateI5rKrp4KelB64iy5prRlmb7C5Dz6/QBaol4FLQEAk3FcV0Poiy+f dJyq5lOuMZfEk7PvQlZluOU5bUKeeM4= =oikP -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
Re: [DNG] Result of the Debian vote 'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
My comments:
A mediocre result, neither good nor bad.
The best option for people who don't want to use systemd, Option 6 "E: Support
for multiple init systems is Required", came in last.
But Option 1 "F: Focus on systemd" came in second place, if it had won it would
have been a tragedy.
We remain more or less as we are ("The Debian project recognizes that systemd
service units are the preferred configuration", "Packages may include support
for alternate init systems besides systemd and may include alternatives for any
systemd-specific interfaces they use", "Maintainers use their normal procedures
for deciding which patches to include", "Debian is committed to working with
derivatives that make different choices about init systems" as a simple
recommendation), now with the certainty that it will remain so for at least
some time. A project offering Debian packages free of systemd dependencies
remains necessary.
Best regards!
Miscelánea Natural http://www.miscelaneanatural.org
Anfibios de Asturias http://www.anfibiosdeasturias.org
HackLab Pica Pica http://www.picahack.org
Actividades de informática con software libre http://eslibreasturias.rf.gd
En sábado, 28 de diciembre de 2019 10:27:35 CET, Alexis PM via Dng
escribió:
Result of the Debian vote
'General Resolution: Init systems and systemd'
https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/vote_002
The voting period ended on Friday 2019-12-27 23:59:59 UTC
Result
https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initsystems/results.txt
The winners are:
Option 2 "B: Systemd but we support exploring alternatives"
Proposal B Proposer: Sam Hartman [hartm...@debian.org] [text of proposal]
[amendment]
Choice 2: B: Systemd but we support exploring alternatives
Using its power under Constitution section 4.1 (5), the project issues the
following statement describing our current position on Init systems, multiple
init systems, and the use of systemd facilities. This statement describes the
position of the project at the time it is adopted. That position may evolve as
time passes without the need to resort to future general resolutions. The GR
process remains available if the project needs a decision and cannot come to a
consensus.
The Debian project recognizes that systemd service units are the preferred
configuration for describing how to start a daemon/service. However, Debian
remains an environment where developers and users can explore and develop
alternate init systems and alternatives to systemd features. Those interested
in exploring such alternatives need to provide the necessary development and
packaging resources to do that work. Technologies such as elogind that
facilitate exploring alternatives while running software that depends on some
systemd interfaces remain important to Debian. It is important that the project
support the efforts of developers working on such technologies where there is
overlap between these technologies and the rest of the project, for example by
reviewing patches and participating in discussions in a timely manner.
Packages should include service units or init scripts to start daemons and
services. Packages may use any systemd facility at the package maintainer's
discretion, provided that this is consistent with other Policy requirements and
the normal expectation that packages shouldn't depend on experimental or
unsupported (in Debian) features of other packages. Packages may include
support for alternate init systems besides systemd and may include alternatives
for any systemd-specific interfaces they use. Maintainers use their normal
procedures for deciding which patches to include.
Debian is committed to working with derivatives that make different choices
about init systems. As with all our interactions with downstreams, the relevant
maintainers will work with the downstreams to figure out which changes it makes
sense to fold into Debian and which changes remain purely in the derivative.
Miscelánea Natural http://www.miscelaneanatural.org
Anfibios de Asturias http://www.anfibiosdeasturias.org
HackLab Pica Pica http://www.picahack.org
Actividades de informática con software libre http://eslibreasturias.rf.gd
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
___
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
