Bug#747535: systemd-fsck?
On Thu, 2014-05-15 at 10:55 +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: Thorsten Glaser t...@debian.org writes: Integration of some components at the cost of disabling the freedom of users to choose a different free component that also does the job, and at the cost of removing some users' use cases: no. That is not the job of a Univeral OS. So-called Enterprise distributions can do that, sure. Downstreams and pure blends, too. But not Debian. Agreed! We have a default, that's what Debian is integrating to. You want to change the default, that's what downstreams are for. You have the freedom to change whichever component you want, if you find people to do the neccessary work. Trying to support N+1 options and integrating them *all* places a huge burden on every single maintainer, a burden you do not want, nor need. The problem (for me) is not the default init system, the problem is that init system is changed without a debconf prompt, in my case by installing network-manager. And NM can be used outside the gnome environment as well as other gnome components. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#747535: systemd-fsck?
Hi, Bas Wijnen: Sounds like those packages should conflict with each other. It isn't a reason to uninstall anything. If you've used aptitude for any length of time, its affinity towards uninstalling half of your system in favor of *any* other way to resolve a conflict should not be surprising, systemd or not. I, as a user, did not expect to be moved over to systemd I expect *users* to not care one way or another. Their system booted quite well before systemd and it will boot, hopefully even better otherwise this was all for nothing, afterwards. I expect people who *really* do not want systemd to blacklist it, by way of apt-preferences. Problem solved. A mere re-ordering of dependencies in random packages will not accomplish that; such re-ordering is also a disservice to that packages' maintainers who use it to express *their* preference. Who says yours trumps theirs? -- -- Matthias Urlichs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#747535: systemd-fsck?
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:54:43AM +0200, Josselin Mouette wrote: Systemd is the default init system for jessie, and it should be listed as the first alternative. Can you please explain what is wrong with my reasoning? A default is only relevant at the time the functionality is first installed. After that, whatever was installed should stay until the user requests to change it (or there is a technical reason that it can no longer be installed). In the case of an init system, installation happens in d-i. Also, this dependency isn't about an init system. That's not the functionality you're depending on. If it would be, sysv init and upstart should be in the list of alternatives as well, and the whole dependency could be dropped (since an init system is Essential). Instead, you're depending on a very limited part of systemd, and say I want people to switch as soon as possible, so I don't have to care about bug reports. Therefore I sneak systemd on their system when they're not watching and if they complain, I tell them 'you clicked the I Agree button, so it's your own fault.' Or that's what you seem to say anyway. But I sincerely hope this is not your attitude, and I welcome you to correct any misunderstanding. The fact that an alternative codepath exists for users with specific needs is nice for them, but it is not what we should focus our efforts on. That is reasonable, but forcing anyone who doesn't carefully watch their system to convert is not the sort of behaviour I expect or want from Debian. One of the reasons I like Debian so much is that I believe we, as developers, are dedicated to allowing our users to do what they want, without forcing things on them unless there's no other way. Your responses put a big dent in that belief. As far as GDM is concerned, any bug reported with systemd-shim installed will be ignored. The bug script should probably be updated to that effect, BTW. Please don't do that. If your priorities are elsewhere, that is obviously acceptable. But then tell this to the reporter. Ignoring bugs is never a good idea. Thanks, Bas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#747535: systemd-fsck?
On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 11:21:15AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: In other words: what isn't handled properly? What should happen, and what does happen? Consider a system which has systemd installed, systemd-sysv *not* installed, and systemd used as PID 1 via init=/bin/systemd. Since systemd-sysv is not already installed, systemd-shim | systemd-sysv will pull in systemd-shim instead, which will atttempt to supply services that conflict with systemd's. Sounds like those packages should conflict with each other. It isn't a reason to uninstall anything. More generally, the order of dependencies doesn't matter for what options the user can choose. If one of those options is buggy, it shouldn't be an option. we want to make sure that only the users who specifically *want* a non-default init run one, I, as a user, did not expect to be moved over to systemd, and given the discussions about it and the older TC decisions about network manager getting its dependencies right (to stop forcing all of gnome onto the user's system), it felt to me as something that was sneaked past me. I don't want Debian to do that. I don't really care about what init system I use, but I do care that I can trust my system. When this happened, I was thinking what else are they going to force onto my system when I'm not watching closely enough? That's my default attitude towards any install or upgrade on a proprietary system, and I most certainly don't want to grow it for Debian users. It's easy enough for any user who *does* care to select a different set of installed packages. It's not so much about caring which init system to use. It's about being in control over your own computer. There are many packages that I use and while I like them being upgraded to new versions, I don't like them to be replaced with different programs. Not unless I ask for it. The exception is when the program I use is no longer supported. When that happens, I'll need something else, and using whatever is default on new installs is a good choice in that case. But again, as long as other init systems are supported, I don't want to do anything to continue using them. Not even something easy. Thanks, Bas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#747535: systemd-fsck?
On Fri, 2014-05-09 at 20:39 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: Russ Allbery wrote: ... I think we need some sort of critical debconf prompt here for the jessie release, similar to how we handled the change of /bin/sh to dash and how we handled the switch to startpar. Probably in systemd-sysv, which is the package that forces the conversion. It's quite surprising to, for example, install network-manager (which is an application that ca be used with non-GNOME window managers) and end up with a new init system. I strongly disagree: if the maintainers of the various packages have done their jobs well (which they have), upgrading should be entirely transparent. ... Why did you downgrade bug #747535 to wishlist? The discussion is ongoing, and no solution has found consensus yet. In further replies, please add the bug number to the Cc: list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#747535: systemd-fsck?
severity 747535 serious thanks Why did you downgrade bug #747535 to wishlist? The discussion is ongoing, and no solution has found consensus yet. I agree, raising the severity. If one (Josh) thinks that is fine, that doesn't mean it is fine. Norbert PREINING, Norbert http://www.preining.info JAIST, Japan TeX Live Debian Developer GPG: 0x860CDC13 fp: F7D8 A928 26E3 16A1 9FA0 ACF0 6CAC A448 860C DC13 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
