subject:"How to avoid stealth installation of systemd\?"

Dear all,

A few days ago, after a routine upgrade from testing, the power button on
my laptop ceased functioning.  I was busy at the time, so I lived with
having to remember to type sudo shutdown -h now for a few days; yesterday,
I finally took the time to debug the issue.

I started with strace -p $(pidof acpid)$, and it took me almost an hour
to work it out.  It turns out that apt had helpfully installed systemd, so
the powerbtn-acpi-support.sh script was detecting a running systemd-logind,
and (reasonably enough) going on strike.

I was a little bit annoyed at that, so I filed bug 753357, which was
immediately closed by Michael Biebl with the following advice:

   install systemd-shim

I reopened the bug and explained that I have no desire to run systemd,
that the actual bug is about silently breaking my power button during
a routine upgrade, and that perhaps, just perhaps, the systemd maintainers
could be so kind as to avoid such issues in the future by adding suitable
conflicts to the systemd package.  The bug was immediately closed again:

   Certainly not.

So I'm turning to this list for help:

  1. Could some competent person tell me the right way to tell apt that it
 should fail an upgrade rather than installing systemd?  I guess
 I could make a dummy package that conflicts with systemd, but I'm
 sure there's a better way.

  2. Could some kind soul explain to the systemd maintainers that gentle
 persuasion, while not always the most efficient way to take over the
 world, is more in line with point 4 of the Debian Social Contract
 than alternative approaches such as bullying?

Thanks a lot,

-- Juliusz


-- 
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/87y4wdyzvz.wl%...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Darac Marjal

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 03:25:36PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
 Dear all,
 
 A few days ago, after a routine upgrade from testing, the power button on
 my laptop ceased functioning.  I was busy at the time, so I lived with
 having to remember to type sudo shutdown -h now for a few days; yesterday,
 I finally took the time to debug the issue.
 
 I started with strace -p $(pidof acpid)$, and it took me almost an hour
 to work it out.  It turns out that apt had helpfully installed systemd, so
 the powerbtn-acpi-support.sh script was detecting a running systemd-logind,
 and (reasonably enough) going on strike.

That sounds like a bug to me. Either in systemd-logind (if that was
supposed to have handled the power button event instead) or in acpid for
not telling systemd-logind about the event.

Hmm. I presume the intention is that logged in users are notified of the
impending shut down. Simply refusing to honour the power button because
of the presence of a process sounds like a nightmare to me.

 
 I was a little bit annoyed at that, so I filed bug 753357, which was
 immediately closed by Michael Biebl with the following advice:
 
install systemd-shim

For the record, and despite its name, systemd-shim is not systemd. If
you read the description of the package, it becomes clearer:

  This package emulates the systemd function that are required to run
  the systemd helpers without using the init service

In other words, systemd-shim is a shim (a thin interfacing layer). You
place it between programs that expect to be able to use systemd and
another init system (sysv usually).

Consider it the reverse of systemd-sysv.

 
 I reopened the bug and explained that I have no desire to run systemd,
 that the actual bug is about silently breaking my power button during
 a routine upgrade, and that perhaps, just perhaps, the systemd maintainers
 could be so kind as to avoid such issues in the future by adding suitable
 conflicts to the systemd package.  The bug was immediately closed again:
 
Certainly not.
 
 So I'm turning to this list for help:
 
   1. Could some competent person tell me the right way to tell apt that it
  should fail an upgrade rather than installing systemd?  I guess
  I could make a dummy package that conflicts with systemd, but I'm
  sure there's a better way.
 
   2. Could some kind soul explain to the systemd maintainers that gentle
  persuasion, while not always the most efficient way to take over the
  world, is more in line with point 4 of the Debian Social Contract
  than alternative approaches such as bullying?
 
 Thanks a lot,
 
 -- Juliusz
 
 
 -- 
 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/87y4wdyzvz.wl%...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr
 


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread vitalif

  1. Could some competent person tell me the right way to tell apt that 
it

 should fail an upgrade rather than installing systemd?  I guess
 I could make a dummy package that conflicts with systemd, but I'm
 sure there's a better way.


I think you can just put

Package: systemd
Pin: origin 
Pin-Priority: -1

in your /etc/apt/preferences...


--
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/bb6c30a51d68aa2e2b773dc4f26d8...@yourcmc.ru

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Vincent Bernat

 ❦  1 juillet 2014 15:25 +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek 
j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr :

 A few days ago, after a routine upgrade from testing, the power button on
 my laptop ceased functioning.  I was busy at the time, so I lived with
 having to remember to type sudo shutdown -h now for a few days; yesterday,
 I finally took the time to debug the issue.

 I started with strace -p $(pidof acpid)$, and it took me almost an hour
 to work it out.  It turns out that apt had helpfully installed systemd, so
 the powerbtn-acpi-support.sh script was detecting a running systemd-logind,
 and (reasonably enough) going on strike.

Not a systemd maintainer.

On your particular problem, you should look at why systemd didn't
initiate the shutdown when it detected you pressed the power button. I
don't know enough of how systemd fits in the power management stack in
Debian (and I miss such details), but I believe, you could modify
/etc/systemd/logind.conf and restart systemd-logind.

systemd being aimed at becoming the default init, it is natural that
various other packages do not step on its tasks by executing various
stuff. acpid is still useful outside those tasks as it allows to
transmit ACPI events as keyboard events (and I suppose other
things). Hence, we surely want it to continue to work with systemd.
-- 
 /* Identify the flock of penguins.  */
2.2.16 /usr/src/linux/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Thijs Kinkhorst

On Tue, July 1, 2014 15:25, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
   2. Could some kind soul explain to the systemd maintainers that gentle
  persuasion, while not always the most efficient way to take over the
  world, is more in line with point 4 of the Debian Social Contract
  than alternative approaches such as bullying?

May I suggest that you treat others the way you want to be treated? When
you chose to use words like steathily, with have a strong connotation of
bad faith, you do not start a constructive bug fixing process. The
suggestion to just add conflicts is also not quite helpful.

The responses from the systemd maintainers are indeed on the terse side,
but I can imagine that your style of bug reporting does not invite our
volunteers to spend more time on it.


Cheers,
Thijs


-- 
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/b728214cb18d13028ce5794bff7819c6.squir...@aphrodite.kinkhorst.nl

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Thorsten Glaser

Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:

So I'm turning to this list for help:

  1. Could some competent person tell me the right way to tell apt that it
 should fail an upgrade rather than installing systemd?  I guess
 I could make a dummy package that conflicts with systemd, but I'm

I made such a dummy package, and Wookey wanted to upload it
yesterday IIRC. It is not on https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
yet, though.

bye,
//mirabilos


-- 
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/louhif$qur$1...@ger.gmane.org

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Neil Williams

On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 18:26:53 +0400
vita...@yourcmc.ru wrote:

1. Could some competent person tell me the right way to tell apt
  that it
   should fail an upgrade rather than installing systemd?  I guess
   I could make a dummy package that conflicts with systemd, but
  I'm sure there's a better way.
 
 I think you can just put
 
 Package: systemd
 Pin: origin 
 Pin-Priority: -1

If what you actually intend is to retain sysvinit-core, it would need to be 
systemd-sysv

-- 


Neil Williams
=
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Thomas Weber

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 04:38:16PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
 The responses from the systemd maintainers are indeed on the terse side,
 but I can imagine that your style of bug reporting does not invite our
 volunteers to spend more time on it.

This is not a question of spending time. An upgrade broke functionality
and purging systemd fixed this issue. That does not mean that it is a
bug in systemd, but it surely is a bug somewhere, be it the dependencies
(if systemd-shim is needed, why was it not installed during the upgrade?)
or the code of some other package.
Now, time is limited, but I don't have time right now is certainly not
a reason to close a bug within three hours.

Or, taking a different perspective: now that the issue is known, what is
done to prevent another user from hitting the very same issue in the
future?

Thomas


-- 
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/20140701152012.GA4890@t61

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Wookey

+++ Thorsten Glaser [2014-07-01 14:45 +]:
 Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
 
 So I'm turning to this list for help:
 
   1. Could some competent person tell me the right way to tell apt that it
  should fail an upgrade rather than installing systemd?  I guess
  I could make a dummy package that conflicts with systemd, but I'm
 
 I made such a dummy package, and Wookey wanted to upload it
 yesterday IIRC. It is not on https://ftp-master.debian.org/new.html
 yet, though.

Ah yes. E-busy. Just uploaded 'prevent-systemd'. Whilst it's sat in NEW, you 
can get it from:
http://wookware.org/software/repo/
i.e deb http://wookware.org/software/repo/ sid main 

You get a choice of 'prevent-systemd' which stops it running as init
but allows the -shim and libpam packages so that logind and the like
will work. Or 'systemd-must-die' which conflicts with everything
systemdish. There may be a need for an intermediate package too, but
lets see how this goes for people.

Wookey
-- 
Principal hats:  Linaro, Emdebian, Wookware, Balloonboard, ARM
http://wookware.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/20140701152301.gm10...@stoneboat.aleph1.co.uk

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

 gentle persuasion [...] is more in line with point 4 of the Debian
 Social Contract than [...] bullying?

 May I suggest that you treat others the way you want to be treated?

I am not a Debian Developer.  I am not bound by the Social Contract.

Are we to expect a higher standard of behaviour from a Debian Developer
than from a random user who is pissed off because his system has just been
broken?  Or is being a Debian Developer power without responsibility, as
some of your esteemed colleagues appear to believe?

 The suggestion to just add conflicts is also not quite helpful.

I'm not sure I'm following.  There was no reason whatsoever to install
systemd on my system, yet it got installed and broke the ACPI scripts.  To
my untrained eyes, it looks like a conflict is missing somewhere.

-- Juliusz


-- 
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/87simlytv8.wl%...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 17:20, schrieb Thomas Weber:
 Or, taking a different perspective: now that the issue is known, what is
 done to prevent another user from hitting the very same issue in the
 future?

Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
installed.


-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez

On 01/07/14 17:20, Thomas Weber wrote:
 Or, taking a different perspective: now that the issue is known, what is
 done to prevent another user from hitting the very same issue in the
 future?

I think that a critical debconf warning should be in place to avoid
replacing the init system of users without prior explicit consent.

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=747535



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 17:35, schrieb Juliusz Chroboczek:
 
 I am not a Debian Developer.  I am not bound by the Social Contract.
 

I may remind you about [1] then. If you feel like you need to rant or
vent, please do it someplace else or expect a terse answer like the one
you got.


[1] https://www.debian.org/vote/2014/vote_002
-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Jakub Wilk


* Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr, 2014-07-01, 15:25:

I filed bug 753357


Why is this bug marked as fixed in systemd/204-9?

--
Jakub Wilk


--
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/20140701160343.ga4...@jwilk.net

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Mirosław Baran


Michael Biebl made an argument from authority:


Am 01.07.2014 17:35, schrieb Juliusz Chroboczek:



I am not a Debian Developer.  I am not bound by the Social Contract.



I may remind you about [1] then. If you feel like you need to rant or
vent, please do it someplace else or expect a terse answer like the one
you got.


Your answer wasn't *just* terse. Your answer was downright rude.

Kind regards,
– Miroslaw Baran


--
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/d834210ada34efc7aeca83a89e022...@hell.pl

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Mirosław Baran


Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:

The responses from the systemd maintainers are indeed on the terse 
side,

but I can imagine that your style of bug reporting does not invite our
volunteers to spend more time on it.


The replies were not just terse, the replies were downright rude.

Can we perhaps agree that the maintainers should not be unnecessarily 
rude?


Kind regards
– Jubal


--
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/b8fa256c3779e8ce42a4f6c471f9e...@hell.pl

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Jose Luis Rivas

On 01/07/14, 05:35pm, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
  gentle persuasion [...] is more in line with point 4 of the Debian
  Social Contract than [...] bullying?
 
  May I suggest that you treat others the way you want to be treated?
 
 I am not a Debian Developer.  I am not bound by the Social Contract.

FYI, you are bound to https://www.debian.org/code_of_conduct. The reason
why that document exists is because the Social Contract has barely
something about behaviour.
 
 Are we to expect a higher standard of behaviour from a Debian Developer
 than from a random user who is pissed off because his system has just been
 broken?  Or is being a Debian Developer power without responsibility, as
 some of your esteemed colleagues appear to believe?

Either Debian Developer or a regular user who's pissed of or happy, we
expect the same higher standard. CoC applies to everyone.
 
  The suggestion to just add conflicts is also not quite helpful.
 
 I'm not sure I'm following.  There was no reason whatsoever to install
 systemd on my system, yet it got installed and broke the ACPI scripts.  To
 my untrained eyes, it looks like a conflict is missing somewhere.

Knowing what exactly installed systemd in your system should be helpful.
It's not like systemd got installed by itself without being a dependency
of another package.

Kind regards.
-- 
Jose Luis Rivas | ghostbar
The Debian Project → http://www.debian.org
GPG D278 F9C1 5E54 61AA 3C1E  2FCD 13EC 43EE B9AC 8C43


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Thijs Kinkhorst

On Tue, July 1, 2014 17:35, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
 gentle persuasion [...] is more in line with point 4 of the Debian
 Social Contract than [...] bullying?

 May I suggest that you treat others the way you want to be treated?

 I am not a Debian Developer.  I am not bound by the Social Contract.

That you think that this highly formalistic argument determines that you
should not have to keep yourself to high standards when reporting bugs, I
think underlines exactly why you got a terse response.

 Are we to expect a higher standard of behaviour from a Debian Developer
 than from a random user who is pissed off because his system has just been
 broken?  Or is being a Debian Developer power without responsibility, as
 some of your esteemed colleagues appear to believe?

No, we expect a minimal standard of everyone that participates in the
Debian ecosystem. I suggest you read the Debian code of conduct before
interacting further with the volunteers that spend their own time to make
a completely free operating system for you to use.


Cheers,
Thijs


-- 
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/fbd8137b157153492ac96d970c136bca.squir...@aphrodite.kinkhorst.nl

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 17:20, Thomas Weber wrote:
 On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 04:38:16PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
  The responses from the systemd maintainers are indeed on the terse side,
  but I can imagine that your style of bug reporting does not invite our
  volunteers to spend more time on it.
 
 This is not a question of spending time. An upgrade broke functionality
 and purging systemd fixed this issue. That does not mean that it is a
 bug in systemd, but it surely is a bug somewhere, be it the dependencies
 (if systemd-shim is needed, why was it not installed during the upgrade?)
 or the code of some other package.
 Now, time is limited, but I don't have time right now is certainly not
 a reason to close a bug within three hours.
 
 Or, taking a different perspective: now that the issue is known, what is
 done to prevent another user from hitting the very same issue in the
 future?

By reporting appropriate bug? If the power button ceased to work there
should be a bug report about power button not working and not about
preventing systemd to be installed.

O.
-- 
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server


--
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/1404231839.20584.136601777.3c78a...@webmail.messagingengine.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:03, Jakub Wilk wrote:
 * Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr, 2014-07-01, 15:25:
 I filed bug 753357
 
 Why is this bug marked as fixed in systemd/204-9?

I suggest to reassign this bug to acpi-support-base and stop this
yet-another-senseless-flamewar-about-systemd in the beginning
pretty please.

O.
-- 
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server


--
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/1404232118.21941.136603961.75c50...@webmail.messagingengine.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Marco d'Itri

On Jul 01, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez clo...@igalia.com wrote:

 I think that a critical debconf warning should be in place to avoid
 replacing the init system of users without prior explicit consent.
I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users, 
since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by systemd.

-- 
ciao,
Marco


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 18:28, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
 On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:03, Jakub Wilk wrote:
 * Juliusz Chroboczek j...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr, 2014-07-01, 15:25:
 I filed bug 753357

 Why is this bug marked as fixed in systemd/204-9?
 
 I suggest to reassign this bug to acpi-support-base and stop this
 yet-another-senseless-flamewar-about-systemd in the beginning
 pretty please.

As explained elsewhere

 Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
 The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
 installed.


The behaviour of acpi-support-base is correct, there shouldn't be any
bug filed against it.


-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

 The replies were not just terse, the replies were downright rude.

That's hardly the main problem with Michael's behaviour.

I reported an actual bug, including conclusions that I got from fourty
minutes of tracing the ACPI scripts.  Michael closed it straight away,
without investigating the issue.  I reopened the bug, explaining the
problem again.  Michael closed it straight away again.

I've filed hundreds of bugs against Debian over the last fifteen years.
The kind of attitude exhibited by Michael is fairly rare, but when it
happens, it harms the whole project by driving users away from the bug
tracker.  I therefore stand by my point that DDs should be held to higher
standards than random users.

-- Juliusz


-- 
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/87egy5yq9k.wl%...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:09, Marco d'Itri wrote:
 On Jul 01, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez clo...@igalia.com wrote:
 
  I think that a critical debconf warning should be in place to avoid
  replacing the init system of users without prior explicit consent.
 I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users, 
 since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by systemd.

Yes and we *have* release notes for this kind of information.

O.
-- 
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server


--
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/1404233608.29272.136613049.4b0b3...@webmail.messagingengine.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 18:53, schrieb Juliusz Chroboczek:
 Michael closed it straight away,
 without investigating the issue.

Oh, I did. That's why I told you to install systemd-shim.

It would be great if you can dial down your accusations a little.

-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez

On 01/07/14 18:09, Marco d'Itri wrote:
 On Jul 01, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez clo...@igalia.com wrote:
 
 I think that a critical debconf warning should be in place to avoid
 replacing the init system of users without prior explicit consent.
 I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users, 
 since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by systemd.
 

Maybe desktops user don't care much about the init system as long as
they can boot to the desktop.

But I think that many sysadmins that are going to upgrade their servers
from wheezy to jessie care about this. I bet that not few of them would
want to stick with sysvinit for jessie at least.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Lars Wirzenius

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 04:23:01PM +0100, Wookey wrote:
 You get a choice of 'prevent-systemd' which stops it running as init
 but allows the -shim and libpam packages so that logind and the like
 will work. Or 'systemd-must-die' which conflicts with everything
 systemdish.

Wookey,

Please rename the systemd-must-die package to something neutral. Thank
you.

-- 
http://www.cafepress.com/trunktees -- geeky funny T-shirts
http://gtdfh.branchable.com/ -- GTD for hackers


-- 
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/20140701173407.GN23218@exolobe1

Re: Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Eric Valette


I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users,
since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by systemd


I do not care being tainted by systemd when it works. Actually on two 
very different machines it means no audio for me.


On a NAS it means no boot(probably because of RAID10 fs in /etc/fstab), 
so I reverted it on all machines


Bug for pulse is open for a while but so far no change.

and BTW, rtkit does not work with systemd208, udsiks2 depends on 
libpam-systemd,   and systemd-shim is incompatible with systemd-shim 
meaning usb key hotplus is now unavailable and rtkit also.


I think that as long as the transition is not smooth, whithout any 
religious conveiction, people will complain. For me, the forced 
transition was introduced too early


-- eric


--
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/53b2f20e.1070...@free.fr

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 06:09:08PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
 On Jul 01, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez clo...@igalia.com wrote:

  I think that a critical debconf warning should be in place to avoid
  replacing the init system of users without prior explicit consent.
 I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users, 
 since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by systemd.

I agree with you (and disagree with Russ) that we shouldn't give everyone a
debconf prompt on upgrade.

But you are willfully misrepresenting the problem.  People care that *their
system doesn't break*; users do not currently have confidence that upgrading
to systemd won't break their system, and this thread started because of a
bug that happened after upgrade.  Finding such bugs, and seeing them closed
with no action, does nothing to inspire further confidence that systemd is
going to be a smooth upgrade.

Whenever anyone expresses concern about systemd reliability on Debian,
systemd apologists are quick to say that it works on their system.  This is
worth exactly nothing.  A wet ball of string would boot 80% of system
configurations; the question is, are we going to live up to Debian's good
name and support the other 20%, or are we going to make every one of those
other users fend for themselves?

There needs to be a lot less sneering at users who are unhappy with systemd,
and a lot more taking ownership of the real and actual issues users are
running into on upgrade.


In this particular case, the problem is a tough one to solve.  systemd is
pulled in by default on upgrade, which we want; but logind won't work unless
there's a process running that provides the systemd dbus interface.  There
are two possible implementations of this interface: systemd-shim, which at
present is only compatible with systemd-logind up to 204; and systemd
itself, which obviously requires a reboot to take effect.

I think the current default to pull in systemd-sysv and not systemd-shim is
wrong, because of the problems introduced on upgrade before rebooting to the
new init.  But the systemd maintainers are anxious to update to a newer
version in unstable, and while there are plans in Ubuntu to make
systemd-shim support the interfaces needed for newer logind, this isn't
ready yet.  If we take systemd 208 into jessie, and systemd-shim
compatibility doesn't land, this means an unavoidably bad experience for
users pre-reboot on upgrade:  the power button won't work (as shown), a
desktop user will not be able to sanely re-login post logout (again due to
logind), various things like brightness controls are AIUI likely to stop
working.


To deliver a proper upgrade experience in jessie, I believe the right answer
is:

 - hold systemd back at 204 until systemd-shim is updated
 - switch the dependency from libpam-systemd to pull in systemd-shim, not
   just systemd-sysv
 - update sysvinit to pull in systemd-sysv by default
 - once systemd-shim supports the 208 interfaces, update systemd
 - post-jessie, drop the dependency on systemd-shim to a non-default
   alternative

This would ensure that users' systems continue to work correctly on upgrade,
rather than being left broken after reboot.  At the same time, it should
ensure that users who upgrade to jessie will by default get systemd as init
on the first reboot, which is what we want.

I don't believe there is a good argument for why we should take a newer
upstream version of systemd for jessie if it means subjecting our users to
pre-reboot breakage on upgrades.

-- 
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

Re: Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Matthias Klumpp

2014-07-01 19:38 GMT+02:00 Eric Valette eric.vale...@free.fr:
I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users,
since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by systemd

I do not care being tainted by systemd when it works. Actually on two very
different machines it means no audio for me.

On a NAS it means no boot(probably because of RAID10 fs in /etc/fstab), so I
reverted it on all machines

Bug for pulse is open for a while but so far no change.

and BTW, rtkit does not work with systemd208, udsiks2 depends on
libpam-systemd, and systemd-shim is incompatible with systemd-shim meaning
usb key hotplus is now unavailable and rtkit also.

I think that as long as the transition is not smooth, whithout any religious
conveiction, people will complain. For me, the forced transition was
introduced too early
These are valid points, and thank you for reporting bugs! However, as
unstable user, some breakage can be expected, and the point for
transitioning early in unstable is to make the transition as smooth as
possible when someone uprades Debian stable, which is not affected by
init-system changes at all.
So I think the transition was just at the right time to create a great
Jessie release.
Cheers,
Matthias

--
Debian Developer | Freedesktop-Developer
I welcome VSRE emails. See http://vsre.info/

--
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/caknhny_e0p3_7+crdwbmopixlw0278so8qxbmufhhq3w9pg...@mail.gmail.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Sune Vuorela

On 2014-07-01, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez clo...@igalia.com wrote:
 Maybe desktops user don't care much about the init system as long as
 they can boot to the desktop.

They care as long as everything works. And for everything works to
keep on happening, we need a effective migration to systemd, or a army
of developers to ensure everything keeps working. I still fail to see
that army.
(for example, with the newest upower and !systemd, the kde plasma
desktop won't allow you to reboot/suspend/... the system. Having someone
investigating it would be nice)

 But I think that many sysadmins that are going to upgrade their servers
 from wheezy to jessie care about this. I bet that not few of them would
 want to stick with sysvinit for jessie at least.

The server sysadmins who cares about this reads release notes.

Please. Let's keep it working for everyone. Systemd now.

/Sune


-- 
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/loustd$fi8$1...@ger.gmane.org

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Lars Wirzenius

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 06:53:27PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
  The replies were not just terse, the replies were downright rude.
 
 That's hardly the main problem with Michael's behaviour.

I stand by what I said yesterday, in a different thread, but the same
mailing list:

# When a project the size of Debian makes a decision on a controversial
# subject, it is natural, and expected, that there is vigorous debate
# about the topic before a decision is reached. After that, however, if
# the debate continues, or members of Debian keep trying to fight the
# decision, or keep bringing it up over and over again, it hurts the
# ability of the project to continue working. If every decision we make
# needs to be re-discussed at the whim of any one disgruntled individual
# for years to come, nobody's going to have fun.

Juliusz, you concluded your bug report with the following paragraph:

 Folks, I understand that you're excited about systemd, but this sort
 of stealthy pulling in of code is something that really pisses
 people off. If I'd rather not be running 15 lines of code as pid
 1, please respect my wishes.

What you did was continue a multi-year-long flame war about systemd.
That was not cool. Even were that not the case, you should have known
that it would not help resolve the problem by being offensive to the
people whose help you need to get things fixed, but you did it anyway.
Was that wise?

Did you deserve to be mistreated because of your impoliteness? No, you
didn't, and, as it happens, I don't think you were. Michael gave you a
constructive suggestion for how to deal with the situation, and even
if was brief about it, I can't see that he was impolite about it.

If you knowingly provoke people, and they don't jump to fulfil your
demands on their free time, then I don't consider that to be rude.

Juliusz:
 I've filed hundreds of bugs against Debian over the last fifteen years.
 The kind of attitude exhibited by Michael is fairly rare, but when it
 happens, it harms the whole project by driving users away from the bug
 tracker.  I therefore stand by my point that DDs should be held to higher
 standards than random users.

I think we should hold everyone to the same standard of behaviour.
Anything else is rude.

Now, can we please stop this thread? It has already pissed off enough
people.

-- 
http://www.cafepress.com/trunktees -- geeky funny T-shirts
http://gtdfh.branchable.com/ -- GTD for hackers


-- 
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/20140701180458.GO23218@exolobe1

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 19:38, schrieb Eric Valette:
 I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users,
 since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by systemd
 
 I do not care being tainted by systemd when it works. Actually on two
 very different machines it means no audio for me.
 
 On a NAS it means no boot(probably because of RAID10 fs in /etc/fstab),
 so I reverted it on all machines

Have you filed a bug report for that?

 Bug for pulse is open for a while but so far no change.

Which bug report is that?

-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Miroslaw,

unless you offer to ack as a front desk for bugs in systemd, then
please go with your judgments elsewhere. Your judgmental
comments are neither helpful nor welcome here.

Thanks,
Ondrej

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:17, Mirosław Baran wrote:
 Michael Biebl made an argument from authority:
 
  Am 01.07.2014 17:35, schrieb Juliusz Chroboczek:
 
  I am not a Debian Developer.  I am not bound by the Social Contract.
 
  I may remind you about [1] then. If you feel like you need to rant or
  vent, please do it someplace else or expect a terse answer like the one
  you got.
 
 Your answer wasn't *just* terse. Your answer was downright rude.
 
 Kind regards,
 – Miroslaw Baran
 
 
 -- 
 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/d834210ada34efc7aeca83a89e022...@hell.pl
 


-- 
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server


--
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/1404238532.4097.136641601.2e1a4...@webmail.messagingengine.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Michael,

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:51, Michael Biebl wrote:
  Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
  The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
  installed.
 
 The behaviour of acpi-support-base is correct, there shouldn't be any
 bug filed against it.

please don't get me wrong, this is not an attack on systemd.

There has to be a bug somewhere, if the power button can stop working
in partial upgrades. Maybe the dependencies need to be tighten or
conflict added or it just needs d/NEWS with explanation?

Ondrej
-- 
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server


--
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/1404238681.4912.136642081.371fc...@webmail.messagingengine.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 20:18, Ondřej Surý wrote:
 Michael,
 
 On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:51, Michael Biebl wrote:
   Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
   The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
   installed.
  
  The behaviour of acpi-support-base is correct, there shouldn't be any
  bug filed against it.
 
 please don't get me wrong, this is not an attack on systemd.
 
 There has to be a bug somewhere, if the power button can stop working
 in partial upgrades. Maybe the dependencies need to be tighten or
 conflict added or it just needs d/NEWS with explanation?

Ah, Steve has just posted an excellent explanation of the situation...

O.
-- 
Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org
Knot DNS (https://www.knot-dns.cz/) – a high-performance DNS server


--
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/1404238880.5705.136643637.3e81f...@webmail.messagingengine.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Vincent Bernat

 ❦  1 juillet 2014 10:53 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org :

  - hold systemd back at 204 until systemd-shim is updated

The way user sessions work is quite different between 204 and 208. I
would hope that Jessie will come with 208 for this reason. Holding
systemd until systemd-shim is ready may prevent that.
-- 
Don't just echo the code with comments - make every comment count.
- The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan  Plauger)


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

 Michael closed it straight away, without investigating the issue.

 Oh, I did. That's why I told you to install systemd-shim.

Now could you please reopen bug 753357, or at least allow me to do it?

-- Juliusz


-- 
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/87zjgsykzv.wl%...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Eric Valette


On 01/07/2014 19:59, Matthias Klumpp wrote:


These are valid points, and thank you for reporting bugs! However, as
unstable user, some breakage can be expected, and the point for
transitioning early in unstable is to make the transition as smooth as
possible when someone uprades Debian stable, which is not affected by
init-system changes at all.


Sure. I also had bug with libc, X and so on in the past breaking the 
machine. Just my personal feeling is that it does currently break valid 
setup a bit easily to my taste (setup running for years on unstable + 
experimental while regularly updated).


Running stable is fine *when you can*. Each user buying a recent AMD/ATI 
graphic cards or and AMD APU for an htpc needs experimental stuff to get 
video acceleration (glamor support is not even in unstable and radeonsi 
and later needs it). Support for recent Intel graphic feature is also 
problematic and vaapi is undergoing massive changes in th same area.


You can indeed argue it is a way of rapidly collecting bugs but you 
better have to fix them rapidly enough or people will revert and/or hold 
their packages for not being annoyed until it stabilizes more and it 
will/may void the target.


And again, I have no religious/sound opinion on which init system is 
better. As an old folk I'm a bit concerned about the size for 
maintainability reasons and the fact that it is almost already mandatory 
because more and more packages starts depending on it or making changes 
that implies systemd (like udisks2) but that's all.


-- eric




--
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/53b30357.2070...@free.fr

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Mirosław Baran



On 1 July 2014 19:15:32 IST, Ondřej Surý ond...@sury.org wrote:

unless you offer to ack as a front desk for bugs in systemd, then
please go with your judgments elsewhere. Your judgmental
comments are neither helpful nor welcome here.

My comment was factual and polite, thank you very much.

Being a DD is not a free pass for being unnecessarily abrasive, and one does 
not get special blessing just by by having their key anointed by the keyring's 
grace.

HTH, HAND
– Mirosław Baran




-- 
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/77d611e1-6844-4d08-ab6d-4554b2600...@email.android.com

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 20:21, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
 On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 20:18, Ondřej Surý wrote:
 Michael,

 On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:51, Michael Biebl wrote:
 Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
 The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
 installed.

 The behaviour of acpi-support-base is correct, there shouldn't be any
 bug filed against it.

 please don't get me wrong, this is not an attack on systemd.

 There has to be a bug somewhere, if the power button can stop working
 in partial upgrades. Maybe the dependencies need to be tighten or
 conflict added or it just needs d/NEWS with explanation?
 
 Ah, Steve has just posted an excellent explanation of the situation...

As I mentioned, the bug reporter didn't have systemd-sysv or
systemd-shim installed.

In 204-9 we tightend the dependencies of libpam-systemd to depend on
systemd-sysv | systemd-shim.

That's the reason why this bug is marked as fixed in 204-9 and I told
him to install systemd-shim manually.

We could extend the check in acpi-support-base to test for the existence
of the systemd-shim binary or the /run/systemd/system directory (which
only exists if systemd is PID 1).
This would also cover the upgrade case Steve mentioned.



Michael


-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Eric Valette


Which bug report is that?



https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=748651

I will try to add the requested debug log ASAP. Dunno where I got the 
initial bogus trace command from. Probably not invented it.


--eric




--
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/53b306c1.7050...@free.fr

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Felipe Sateler

On Tue, 01 Jul 2014 20:08:35 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:

 Am 01.07.2014 19:38, schrieb Eric Valette:
 I think that this would be an annoying waste of time for most users,
 since only a few people care so much about not being tainted by
 systemd
 
 I do not care being tainted by systemd when it works. Actually on two
 very different machines it means no audio for me.
 
 On a NAS it means no boot(probably because of RAID10 fs in /etc/fstab),
 so I reverted it on all machines
 
 Have you filed a bug report for that?
 
 Bug for pulse is open for a while but so far no change.
 
 Which bug report is that?

#748651, any help is appreciated



-- 
Saludos,
Felipe Sateler


-- 
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/lov114$1p5$1...@ger.gmane.org

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 08:23:09PM +0200, Vincent Bernat wrote:
  ❦  1 juillet 2014 10:53 -0700, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org :

   - hold systemd back at 204 until systemd-shim is updated

 The way user sessions work is quite different between 204 and 208. I
 would hope that Jessie will come with 208 for this reason. Holding
 systemd until systemd-shim is ready may prevent that.

Yes, you're right that this is a risk.  The risk of this happening if we
stick with systemd 204 until systemd-shim is ready is roughly the same as
the risk of our users having broken desktops on upgrade if we move to
systemd 208 and systemd-shim is not ready.

The question is which of these is a worse outcome for the jessie release.  I
come down firmly on the side that breaking desktops on upgrade is a worse
outcome than being behind on the latest and greatest user session interfaces.

-- 
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

systemd-shim [Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?]

Am 01.07.2014 19:53, schrieb Steve Langasek:
 new init.  But the systemd maintainers are anxious to update to a newer
 version in unstable, and while there are plans in Ubuntu to make
 systemd-shim support the interfaces needed for newer logind, this isn't
 ready yet.

This issue has been known since December 2013 and was also discussed
during the ctte debate.

Tollef back then promised to hold back any updates until May 2014.
We are way past that date.

And still, there are just plans to update systemd-shim, no concrete code.

As of this writing 204, is already over 1 year old and will be grossly
outdated once jessie releases. It also misses a lot of important
functionality.
That missing functionality is holding back other maintainers, like the
GNOME maintainers which need a newer logind for 3.12 or the AppArmor
folks, which want the AppArmorProfile support in v210.

I do not think it's reasonable to hold back any updates of systemd in
the hope that an updated systemd-shim eventually appears.

Michael
-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Hi Michael,

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 05:37:55PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
 Am 01.07.2014 17:20, schrieb Thomas Weber:
  Or, taking a different perspective: now that the issue is known, what is
  done to prevent another user from hitting the very same issue in the
  future?

 Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
 The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
 installed.

Ok, but assuming that is the fix (install systemd-sysv or systemd-shim), how
did bug #7533357 happen?  Notwithstanding Juliusz's desire to not have
systemd installed (which I don't expect us to address), if both of those
packages were missing from the system, then something is buggy.  Juliusz,
can you please paste your apt logs showing what pulled systemd in on the
system?

If something is depending on systemd directly without either systemd-sysv or
systemd-shim, that something is buggy.

If systemd-sysv *was* installed and logind wasn't working, this probably
points to the bug with logind being broken before reboot to systemd.

However, acpi-support-base also needs to make sure that logind is functional
before delegating control of the power button to it.  And for that, I see
that acpi-support 0.141-4 introduced a change in unstable *yesterday* to
deal with exactly this problem: instead of only checking for a running
logind, acpi-support-base now checks the systemd dbus interface to verify
that logind is running and usable.  So it's possible that Juliusz's issue is
a duplicate of bug #752781.

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 07:19:26PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
 Am 01.07.2014 18:53, schrieb Juliusz Chroboczek:
  Michael closed it straight away,
  without investigating the issue.

 Oh, I did. That's why I told you to install systemd-shim.

It should not be the user's responsibility to install this package manually
to get back to a working system.

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 06:51:22PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
  Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
  The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
  installed.

 The behaviour of acpi-support-base is correct, there shouldn't be any
 bug filed against it.

Well, I think the behavior of acpi-support-base is *now* correct in
unstable, in response to bug #752781.  I don't think it's correct in
testing.

-- 
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

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 21:06, schrieb Eric Valette:
 Which bug report is that?
 
 
 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=748651

Ok, thanks for sharing.

As for the issue you encountered on your NAS using RAID10: Please do
file a bug report and we will follow up there

Michael


-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 21:33, schrieb Steve Langasek:

 Ok, thanks for this clarification.  I didn't realize this dependency had not
 yet made it into testing.
 
 FWIW, from reading the bug log, it was not clear to me that you were taking
 responsibility for this bug and stating that it had been fixed in systemd
 204-9.  In fact, I was completely puzzled that the versioned bug closure.
 I would suggest that a little more verbosity here might have spared us all a
 bit of angst.

Indeed, I take the blame for my verbosity here.



-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

Am 01.07.2014 21:34, schrieb Michael Biebl:
 Indeed, I take the blame for my verbosity here.

Or non-verbosity, if you so wish.

I do have to add that the tone of the bug report didn't really inspire
me to write paragraphs of explanations.

You know, I'm also just a human.

-- 
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 08:57:37PM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
 Am 01.07.2014 20:21, schrieb Ondřej Surý:
  On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 20:18, Ondřej Surý wrote:
  Michael,

  On Tue, Jul 1, 2014, at 18:51, Michael Biebl wrote:
  Install systemd-sysv for systemd-shim.
  The libpam-systemd package in 204-9 ensures that either of the two is
  installed.

  The behaviour of acpi-support-base is correct, there shouldn't be any
  bug filed against it.

  please don't get me wrong, this is not an attack on systemd.

  There has to be a bug somewhere, if the power button can stop working
  in partial upgrades. Maybe the dependencies need to be tighten or
  conflict added or it just needs d/NEWS with explanation?

  Ah, Steve has just posted an excellent explanation of the situation...

 As I mentioned, the bug reporter didn't have systemd-sysv or
 systemd-shim installed.

 In 204-9 we tightend the dependencies of libpam-systemd to depend on
 systemd-sysv | systemd-shim.

 That's the reason why this bug is marked as fixed in 204-9 and I told
 him to install systemd-shim manually.

Ok, thanks for this clarification.  I didn't realize this dependency had not
yet made it into testing.

FWIW, from reading the bug log, it was not clear to me that you were taking
responsibility for this bug and stating that it had been fixed in systemd
204-9.  In fact, I was completely puzzled that the versioned bug closure.
I would suggest that a little more verbosity here might have spared us all a
bit of angst.

-- 
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

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Sune Vuorela

On 2014-07-01, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
 The question is which of these is a worse outcome for the jessie release.  I
 come down firmly on the side that breaking desktops on upgrade is a worse
 outcome than being behind on the latest and greatest user session interface=
 s.

We already have broken desktops-on-upgrade with current systemd-shim in
the archive. And it is even broken after reboot.
It might be bugs in the desktop related packages, but it is also a very
low priority one.

Also, post-upgrade-pre-reboot systems has had issues since forever, and
I think even the upgrade notes recommends to not dist-upgrade from
within X.

So, where do we want to put our resources?
Improving the actual experience once fully upgraded and rebooted? Or
ensure a better experience when in the middle of the upgrade and not yet
rebooted?

I know where I would put the resources I can allocate.

/Sune


-- 
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/lov38o$2ah$1...@ger.gmane.org

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

 Juliusz, can you please paste your apt logs showing what pulled systemd
 in on the system?

Sent by private mail.  If anyone else wants a copy, please drop me a note.

-- Juliusz


-- 
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/87tx70yhzr.wl%...@pps.univ-paris-diderot.fr

Re: systemd-shim [Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?]

2014-07-01 Thread Tollef Fog Heen

]] Michael Biebl 

 Am 01.07.2014 19:53, schrieb Steve Langasek:
  new init.  But the systemd maintainers are anxious to update to a newer
  version in unstable, and while there are plans in Ubuntu to make
  systemd-shim support the interfaces needed for newer logind, this isn't
  ready yet.
 
 This issue has been known since December 2013 and was also discussed
 during the ctte debate.
 
 Tollef back then promised to hold back any updates until May 2014.
 We are way past that date.

Just as a heads-up: We're planning on making 208 hit unstable once 204-9
is in testing, and then follow up with newer versions once we deem they
are ready.

Cc-ed to systemd-shim@packages so those maintainers are explicitly
aware.

Cheers,
-- 
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are


-- 
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/87ha30rgte@xoog.err.no

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Joerg Jaspert

On 13624 March 1977, Lars Wirzenius wrote:

 You get a choice of 'prevent-systemd' which stops it running as init
 but allows the -shim and libpam packages so that logind and the like
 will work. Or 'systemd-must-die' which conflicts with everything
 systemdish.
 Please rename the systemd-must-die package to something neutral. Thank
 you.

A package with this name wont ever appear in the archive, and I just
rejected it.

-- 
bye, Joerg
I’ve figured out an alternative to giving up my beer. Basically, we
become a family of travelling acrobats.


--
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/87zjgssuxa@gkar.ganneff.de

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 07:47:36PM +, Sune Vuorela wrote:
 On 2014-07-01, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
  The question is which of these is a worse outcome for the jessie release.  I
  come down firmly on the side that breaking desktops on upgrade is a worse
  outcome than being behind on the latest and greatest user session interface=
  s.

 We already have broken desktops-on-upgrade with current systemd-shim in
 the archive. And it is even broken after reboot.

  https://bugs.debian.org/src:systemd-shim

Show me a bug report, not FUD.

 It might be bugs in the desktop related packages, but it is also a very
 low priority one.

The bugs are almost certainly not specific to systemd-shim.  It'd be just
peachy if the desktop maintainers would stop blaming systemd-shim for all
their bugs without testing.

 Also, post-upgrade-pre-reboot systems has had issues since forever,

No.  There have been very few instances in which the system was left in an
unusable state after a dist-upgrade, even for desktops.

Stop making excuses for delivering a poor upgrade experience to our users.

 and I think even the upgrade notes recommends to not dist-upgrade from
 within X.

This was written at a time when X itself was considered flaky enough that it
posed a risk to the user's ability to complete the upgrade.  After years of
improvements to X, careful rewrites of display managers to not restart
sessions on upgrade, and fixes to PAM + screensavers to ensure users are not
locked out of their desktop mid-upgrade, there is no longer a good reason
for such a warning.

Unless we bring one back by letting systemd + desktop environments screw us
over anew.

 I know where I would put the resources I can allocate.

Into mailing list threads telling us how we shouldn't expect smooth upgrades
from Debian?

This is a race to the bottom.

-- 
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

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Svante Signell

On Tue, 2014-07-01 at 22:09 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote:
 On 13624 March 1977, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
 
  You get a choice of 'prevent-systemd' which stops it running as init
  but allows the -shim and libpam packages so that logind and the like
  will work. Or 'systemd-must-die' which conflicts with everything
  systemdish.
  Please rename the systemd-must-die package to something neutral. Thank
  you.
 
 A package with this name wont ever appear in the archive, and I just
 rejected it.

What about systemd-nogo or nogo-systemd, alternately just no-systemd?



-- 
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/1404248307.31104.23.camel@PackardBell-PC

Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?

2014-07-01 Thread Sune Vuorela

On 2014-07-01, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org wrote:
   https://bugs.debian.org/src:systemd-shim

 Show me a bug report, not FUD.

I'd rather point to the likely-faulty code.

it is likely in or around 
src:kde-workspace/powerdevil/daemon/backends/upower/powerdevilupowerbackend.cpp 
when checking for suspend capabilities with upower from experimental. 

Something in there doesn't properly detect that systemd-shim + logind actually 
can 
let you suspend the machine (and upower 0.99 has delegated it to
logind).

 Also, post-upgrade-pre-reboot systems has had issues since forever,

 No.  There have been very few instances in which the system was left in an
 unusable state after a dist-upgrade, even for desktops.

Try do a update of your kde-plasma-desktop across where the internal
on-disk data cache changes (at least every y in x.y.z, and sometimes in
.z releases). The web browser stops working, the email application stops
working, anything that uses the on-disk caches for looking up their
plugins ceases to work.

This is how it has been as long as I've been around.


 and I think even the upgrade notes recommends to not dist-upgrade from
 within X.

 This was written at a time when X itself was considered flaky enough that it
 posed a risk to the user's ability to complete the upgrade.  After years of

|4.1.5. Prepare a safe environment for the upgrade
|
|The distribution upgrade should be done either locally from a textmode
|virtual console (or a directly connected serial terminal), or remotely
|via an ssh link.

 Unless we bring one back by letting systemd + desktop environments screw us
 over anew.

Here is nothing new.

/Sune


-- 
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/lov93v$c79$1...@ger.gmane.org

Re: systemd-shim [Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?]

2014-07-01 Thread Tshepang Lekhonkhobe

On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 9:59 PM, Tollef Fog Heen tfh...@err.no wrote:
 ]] Michael Biebl

 Am 01.07.2014 19:53, schrieb Steve Langasek:
  new init.  But the systemd maintainers are anxious to update to a newer
  version in unstable, and while there are plans in Ubuntu to make
  systemd-shim support the interfaces needed for newer logind, this isn't
  ready yet.

 This issue has been known since December 2013 and was also discussed
 during the ctte debate.

 Tollef back then promised to hold back any updates until May 2014.
 We are way past that date.

 Just as a heads-up: We're planning on making 208 hit unstable once 204-9
 is in testing, and then follow up with newer versions once we deem they
 are ready.

 Cc-ed to systemd-shim@packages so those maintainers are explicitly
 aware.


Do you mean 204-14?


-- 
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/caa77j2dvkyrtdglt9rez4-uobefrgvynfzs9jcnotcaegff...@mail.gmail.com

Re: systemd-shim [Re: How to avoid stealth installation of systemd?]