Policy says new Pre-Depends should be discussed on debian-devel so let's try that. (Please do not derail this thread into discussing whether systemd is a good thing or not, everyone is tired of that.)
Quick summary of #753589 for debian-devel readers: Essential:yes packages are expected to provide their functionality while merely unpacked, even when not yet configured. The new init package is Essential:yes, and the functionality it represents includes sysvinit-compatible implementations of runlevel(8), shutdown(8), halt(8), telinit(8), poweroff(8) and reboot(8). At least runlevel(8) is actively used via invoke-rc.d in maintainer scripts, leading to #753589. (Side point: I'm also going to open a bug asking that invoke-rc.d stop trying to determine the runlevel under systemd, because it's rather meaningless. The same is probably true of Upstart.) init pre-depends on a sysv-compatible init implementation to provide those tools: sysvinit-core | systemd-sysv | upstart. This makes those tools "transitively Essential", so they are also expected to function when merely unpacked. Under systemd-sysv, all of those tools are symlinks to /bin/systemctl. Michael's proposed patch is simple: > diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules ... > +# the SysV compat tools (which are symlinks to systemctl) are quasi-essential > +# so we add the depencencies of systemctl to Pre-Depends > +# https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=753589 > +override_dh_shlibdeps: > + dh_shlibdeps -psystemd -- -dPre-Depends -edebian/systemd/bin/systemctl > -dDepends > + dh_shlibdeps --remaining-packages resulting in: > Control files: lines which differ (wdiff format) > ------------------------------------------------ > Depends: libacl1 (>= 2.2.51-8), libaudit1 (>= 1:2.2.1), libblkid1 (>= > 2.17.2), [-libc6 (>= 2.17),-] libcap2 (>= 2.10), libcryptsetup4 (>= 2:1.4.3), > libdbus-1-3 (>= 1.1.1), [-libgcrypt11 (>= 1.5.1),-] libkmod2 (>= 5~), > [-liblzma5 (>= 5.1.1alpha+20120614),-] libpam0g (>= 0.99.7.1), libselinux1 > (>= 2.1.9), [-libsystemd-daemon0 (= 208-5),-] libsystemd-journal0 (= 208-5), > libudev1 (>= 189), libwrap0 (>= 7.6-4~), libsystemd-login0 (= 208-5), > util-linux (>= 2.19.1-2), initscripts (>= 2.88dsf-17), sysv-rc, udev, acl, > adduser, libcap2-bin > {+Pre-Depends: libc6 (>= 2.17), libdbus-1-3 (>= 1.0.2), libgcrypt11 (>= > 1.5.1), liblzma5 (>= 5.1.1alpha+20120614), libselinux1 (>= 2.0.65), > libsystemd-daemon0 (= 208-5)+} Expanded dependency tree: libc6 is already quasi-Essential, via e.g. coreutils libdbus-1-3 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.17) libgcrypt11 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.15) libgcrypt11 Depends: libgpg-error0 (>= 1.10), already satisfied in stable libgpg-error0 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14) liblzma5 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.4), already satisfied in stable libselinux1 is already quasi-Essential, via coreutils libsystemd-daemon0 Depends: libc6 (>= 2.8), already satisfied in stable Michael wrote: > The Pre-Depends list is still a bit long. > But I guess there is no way around to it. I don't think that list looks too bad: all the libraries added to it are quite self-contained. The only way I can see to reduce that list would be to reimplement the sysv compatibility tools as one or more separate binaries, in which case the question would be: how much of their functionality is Essential? I don't see any reason why it would be reasonable for a maintainer script to do anything with those tools except runlevel, telinit q, or telinit u. S -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
