Hi,
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:
> AFAICT we are all agreed that:
[...]
> * Applications which aren't part of the init system must not require a
> particular init to be pid 1. (So in particular a desktop
> environment may not require a particular pid 1.)
What about applications that are specifically designed to work with a
particular init system? DSA was investigating setting up systemd for
codesearch.debian.net which uses it to manage worker pools (including
startup via socket activation and load balancing IIRC).
Another example would be a seperate gnome-session-systemd package[1].
I don't think tech-ctte should forbid people to maintain such packages
if they wish to.
[1] Let's assume this only provides a (possibly non-default)
alternative for and doesn't replace gnome-session here.
Of course these might work (partially) if someone implemented enough of
the systemd dbus interfaces to make the user systemd work without
systemd being pid-1 as well. However (without having investigated this)
I would assume this unlikely to happen.
Maintainers only should not drop support for a (default) init system
when the application supports it. This would be similar to the situation
with different kernels: when applications support all of them, fine, but
there may be programs that require a specific kernel.
Ansgar
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
