Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-30 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:48:52PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Sure. Both systemd and upstart manage to avoid the problem of inconsistent behavior due to tainted admin environments, because daemons are always started as children of init and not of the admin's login shell. That being the

Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-30 Thread Russ Allbery
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes: On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:48:52PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: I have never seen a gratuitous incompatibility caused by this. Do you have any examples? I would argue that every single result returned by 'ls -l /usr/sbin/ /usr/bin|grep /bin',

Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-02 Thread Tollef Fog Heen
]] Ian Jackson It's not clear to me from the discussion there exactly what systemd upstream's position on this kind of thing is. Can someone point us, for example, to a statement by the systemd upstreams about their support for separate /usr (or their non-support for it) ?

Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-02 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 09:28:23AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: ]] Ian Jackson It's not clear to me from the discussion there exactly what systemd upstream's position on this kind of thing is. Can someone point us, for example, to a statement by the systemd upstreams about their

Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-02 Thread Russ Allbery
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes: Note that the original complaint in the samba upstream discussion was about hard-coding of paths to system utilities, which a) is not portable between distributions and b) contradicts Debian policy. So systemd upstream may support separate /usr, but

Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-02 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:24:41AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes: Note that the original complaint in the samba upstream discussion was about hard-coding of paths to system utilities, which a) is not portable between distributions and b) contradicts

Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-02 Thread Russ Allbery
Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org writes: On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 11:24:41AM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: They're fairly trivial ones, though, no? Maintaining a local patch to change the paths in a systemd unit is certainly way less effort than maintaining the whole unit. It's akin to changing

Bug#727708: systemd and support for other distros

2013-12-01 Thread Ian Jackson
In the systemd statement we see: Systemd's upstream is very accommodating to distributors. They are taking a lot of Debian's needs into account, even though it has not yet been decided to make it the default. The upstart statement says: systemd upstream paints a utopian vision where