Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Mon, 24 Aug 2009, Bernd Zeimetz wrote: >> No, decimal numbers are the superior design here as they just work without >> any >> magic. One of the reasons I migrated away from SuSE long time ago was the >> mess >> called insserv... > > There are reports of init script not working because they rely on some > other (unexpected) initialization done by other scripts, i.e. numbers > were wrong and could not be easily fixed. And there's nothing magic in the > dependency based system.
Then get your numbers straight and your system boots again. Trying to debug problems with insserv is a waste of time when the old sys-rc just worked well. > How do you get that confidence without testing it on a large scale such as > unstable? It's not like he did not work on this before-hand. It has been > tested but there's no way he could have tested all combinations. When was it uploaded to experimental? When was there a call to test the new things while they're in experimental? This is NOT the way really important parts of Debian should be maintained. >> Debian's had multiple choices for init scripts for a long time (file-rc >> vs sysv-rc). I don't think there's any good reason to throw that out the >> window. > > I'm not asking for that. Neither does Petter: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=538959#54 He is not asking to remove file-rc, but to modify it to use dependency based booting, which is an absolute no-go. File-rc is slim and fast and works very very well, I can't see a reason why one should change that. > [....] > I would like to mention the fact that the new file-rc maintainer is not > really cooperative either (thus not improving the situation for its > users). It would be nice if Alexander pointed out why he doesn't want to > fix 539609, his angry reply in > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=539591#15 doesn't bring > the discussion forward while Petter tried to lay the path to allow file-rc > to be a working alternative again. Please read the mail from Alexander again. There is *NO* need to change it, as long as Debian does not enforce dependency-based boot via policy. Insserv is clearly not the way to go imho, maybe upstart one day, who knows. >> (In other words, not all Debian systems are alike. That Debian allows >> the variaty and we don't say "uh, but all people use >> (gnome|kde|whatever), this is not supported" is one of our (almost >> unique) selling points. For what reason should we do it different this >> time, especially without being forced?) > > You can request choice, but the choice should not come at the expense > of not improving our default boot system. Not a problem here, just get those bugs in insserv fixed. Removing file-rc and migrating back to sys-rc is not a problem also, why should this not be possible for sys-rc with insserv? Or why does one not give users the choise to use dependency-based boot or not? Why are such changes forced without getting consensus first? > It think Petter communicated largely on his goal for quite a long time. > It's been a release goal for Lenny already. He organized a BoF at debconf > too. There are a lot of talks and bofs at debconfs. A lot of them don't result in a change in Debian soon. > Very similar to the dash RG except that he did not say on -devel that he > will do it soon. Which is exactly the problem. Announcing such changes, asking people to test things, that's the right way. -- Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79 ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
