[Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1855140] Re: How to handle tmpfiles.d in non-systemd environments

2020-03-23 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
This waits on systemd for a general approach/solution. Related discussions that happened already: - https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2020/01/msg00032.html - https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/2020-February/040911.html ** Tags removed: server-triage-discuss -- You received this

[Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1855140] Re: How to handle tmpfiles.d in non-systemd environments

2020-02-17 Thread Robie Basak
> From my understanding this means that supporting an alternative init system is optional ("Packages may include support for alternate init systems besides systemd"). So basically this is up to the package maintainer whether or not the package should support an alternative init system. I'm not

[Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1855140] Re: How to handle tmpfiles.d in non-systemd environments

2020-02-13 Thread Claudio Kuenzler
Hi Christian According to https://www.debian.org/vote/2019/vote_002#outcome the decision was to use "Systemd but we support exploring alternatives". >From the proposal: "Packages should include service units or init scripts to start daemons and services. Packages may use any systemd facility at

[Ubuntu-ha] [Bug 1855140] Re: How to handle tmpfiles.d in non-systemd environments

2019-12-10 Thread Christian Ehrhardt 
I reworded the bug Description to be the general discussion that it is. Waiting for: - Debian GR [1] to complete as its decision has direct impact on how to handle this in packages - Ubuntu systemd maintainers to chime in as this might have been discussed in other bugs before [1]: