On 16/01/14 06:09, Martin Pitt wrote: > There's no practical way to drop sysv of course, at least as long as > we have non-Linux ports.
If maintainers are particularly keen to drop support for SysV, that encourages porters to go with either OpenRC or a port of Upstart. Then you could drop SysV support as long as your package has a native init definition for whichever of those is used on ports. Porters could test or even write that for you. On 16/01/14 09:03, Anthony Towns wrote: > It's reasonable to semi-continuously test installation scripts for > thousands of packages -- that's what piuparts does The modern init systems likely have a clearer idea of whether the daemon started successfully or not, so this seems to make sense. If tests can be run on every port, that would also catch daemon startup bugs that are not even due to the init script. A really nice dashboard may also show a diff of changes in the default init script, to keep track of when the others might need updating. Maybe that's similar to how translators' work is done. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ctte-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52d7cc9b.90...@pyro.eu.org