On 3/1/20 5:15 PM, Ondřej Surý wrote: > Package: opentmpfiles > Version: 0.2+2019.05.21.git.44a55796ba-2 > Severity: important > > Dear Maintainer, > > to make opentmpfiles usable for package maintainers > it needs to be drop-in replacement in a sense that > I can rely on the interface to be available for my > packages. Not by calling extra script, not by adding > extra shell spaghetti to decide whether systemd-tmpfiles > is available and if not try opentmpfiles and if not ... > > As a packager I want to be able to freely use the > declaratife interfaces provided by systemd even when > writing sysv-rc scripts. The other option would be > to just drop the init script and provide just the > service file, but I am not decided I want to go > this path. > > Ondrej
Hi Ondrej, I very much agree with this, which is why there's a bug open against the tech ctte: #947847 (which I'm CC-ing hereby). That's probably too much reading. Basically, I'm asking the tech ctte what is the best way to achieve what you described above. We're down to: - using update-alternatives The tech ctte and the systemd maintainer expressed themselves against the idea. - having systemd package tmpfiles and sysusers in separate packages, and have them conflict with open{sysusers,tmpfiles} This could work, but would need some non-trivial work from systemd maintainers, also the systemd version may be a little too big. Also, that's micro-packaging, and we're not sure if that's the solution. If we go that path, maybe we will need 2 new virtual packages. - using dpkg-divert in open{sysusers,tmpfiles} to replace the systemd implementations. That's really what I would hate doing, because this would hide things from our users. Most Debian users don't even know about dpkg-divert, and even less how to use it. The question I've opened to the tech ctte is wider than just how to package open{sysusers,tmpfiles}, it's also about how reverse dependency should use it. Contrary to what I've been told, the point of using open{sysusers,tmpfiles} goes beyond just non-linux ports: I want them to be real alternatives, including in small environment (containers, VMs, embedded), and I want that any user can choose what to use, even if systemd is installed. I hope I'll be heard. So, this bug will continue to be open until the tech ctte decides, or the systemd maintainers agree to be open{sysusers,tmpfiles} friendly, whatever comes first. Until then, I'm also putting on hold any work on these 2 packages. Cheers, Thomas Goirand (zigo)