Re: GR - collecting proposals (was Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now)
Quoting Marco d'Itri (m...@linux.it): > On Jul 09, Alessio Treglia wrote: > > > I think that it would be valuable for our users to keep the > > non-default init system working on Jessie for those who do neither > > intend nor need to switch to systemd. > I suggest less thinking and more coding then, because an updated > systemd-shim still has not magically appeared. I'm working on a systemd-shim update to do the cgroup setup on login. However if someone with a better understanding of all the slices and scopes and sessions has an interest please let me know and don't let me hold you back! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140709172957.GT1132@ubuntumail
Re: GR - collecting proposals (was Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now)
On Jul 09, Alessio Treglia wrote: > I think that it would be valuable for our users to keep the > non-default init system working on Jessie for those who do neither > intend nor need to switch to systemd. I suggest less thinking and more coding then, because an updated systemd-shim still has not magically appeared. -- ciao, Marco signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: GR - collecting proposals (was Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now)
On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 3:28 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: >- existing installations of older (pre-jessie) Debian may be > upgraded to our new standard init system systemd, but only > after the user has been suitably warned, e.g. via a debconf > propmpt at priority "medium" (i.e. not shown to novices) >(maintenance burden is on the package maintainers, plus a >possible team of volunteers, for the init scripts; maintenance >burden for the upgrade scenario is with the maintainers of the >affected packages (sysvinit and systemd, AIUI)) >=> we promote our new default, but permit our users to choose > for themselves, if they feel they are technically skilled > enough to make this choice and live with the limitations > of a non-standard system; switching back and forth between > the two supported systems is always possible I appreciate this as it is about freedom of choice. I think that it would be valuable for our users to keep the non-default init system working on Jessie for those who do neither intend nor need to switch to systemd. Cheers. -- Alessio Treglia | www.alessiotreglia.com Debian Developer | ales...@debian.org Ubuntu Core Developer| quadris...@ubuntu.com 0416 0004 A827 6E40 BB98 90FB E8A4 8AE5 311D 765A -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/CAMHuwozJ+FMBSDczUYw9=+thycs93f2fthp+2acb_t39pag...@mail.gmail.com
Re: GR - collecting proposals (was Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now)
t...@debian.org wrote: >Steve McIntyre wrote: > >>with this constant bickering and sniping. If you must do it, start the >>GR and see how that goes. I even offer to second it just to help get > >Can you help formulate? I do not feel my English skills are >up to that. I'm sorry, I don't really have time to do this right now. I'm already say too stretched with my current workload. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.st...@einval.com Support the Campaign for Audiovisual Free Expression: http://www.eff.org/cafe/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e1x4t0j-0004pc...@mail.einval.com
Re: GR - collecting proposals (was Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now)
On 07/04/2014 10:28 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote: > 4) all init systems currently in Debian are supported in jessie; We don't need a GR to support this option. Of course, all init systems are supported, to the best of our efforts, and I don't see why someone would refuse a patch. I haven't seen such a behavior so far. Please don't start a GR with such foolish choice as 1) to 3), where we may decide to stop supporting alternative init systems. This isn't the current situation, we just have decided for a default init system, and that's enough (for now). Instead, wouldn't you help with alternatives? Like for example, help with porting upstart to kFreeBSD and Hurd, or help with OpenRC to detach the parser from the boot system would help (and I haven't found the time to work on that so far, unfortunately). Cheers, Thomas -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/53b79b39.4080...@debian.org
GR - collecting proposals (was Re: systemd is here to stay, get over it now)
Steve McIntyre wrote: >with this constant bickering and sniping. If you must do it, start the >GR and see how that goes. I even offer to second it just to help get Can you help formulate? I do not feel my English skills are up to that. Also, what options do we need? 1) systemd is the only init system supported in jessie (for Linux) => we accept the change and require all users to follow our new default 2) systemd and sysvinit are both supported in jessie, but sysvinit is only supported for systems upgraded from older Debian installs; package maintainers have to at least not actively break existing sysvinit support and should accept patches to keep sysvinit with sysv-rc working => we accept the change but do not enforce it on all users; we intend to keep the old way working for as long as reasonably possible, even though it means degraded operation for some (maintenance burden is on the package maintainers, plus a possible team of volunteers) 3) systemd and sysv are both supported in jessie (for all ports, probably - Hurd in any case, I don't know what the kFreeBSD people have); package maintainers have to at least not actively break existing sysvinit support and must accept patches to keep sysvinit with sysv-rc working - new installations must either offer a choice of init system, or install systemd and offer switching the init system to sysvinit later (e.g. via apt-get install, possibly with the famous "Yes I know what I am doing" prompt) (maintenance burden is on the maintainers of d-i and systemd and sysvinit, for this; the way is to be decided by CTTE if those do not find a suitable one by themselves) - existing installations of older (pre-jessie) Debian may be upgraded to our new standard init system systemd, but only after the user has been suitably warned, e.g. via a debconf propmpt at priority "medium" (i.e. not shown to novices) (maintenance burden is on the package maintainers, plus a possible team of volunteers, for the init scripts; maintenance burden for the upgrade scenario is with the maintainers of the affected packages (sysvinit and systemd, AIUI)) => we promote our new default, but permit our users to choose for themselves, if they feel they are technically skilled enough to make this choice and live with the limitations of a non-standard system; switching back and forth between the two supported systems is always possible 4) all init systems currently in Debian are supported in jessie; maintainers must support sysvinit at least as in 3) and are encouraged to accept patches for file-rc, upstart, possibly OpenRC and runit - new installations operate as in 3) except support for all init systems that are not either the old default (sysv-rc) or the new default (systemd) may use a more complicated path (e.g. switch from systemd to sysvinit first, then to the other init system) (maintenance burden for sysvinit is on the package maintainers; maintenance burden for the other init systems is on the maintainers of those init systems; the path to switch between init systems is to be decided by CTTE if the maintainers of the init systems do not find a suitable way by themselves) - existing installations can keep running, although we may migrade existing installations of the old default to the new default as in 3) above (e.g. debconf "medium") => we promote freedom of choice, and our new default is the preselected choice, but users who feel they can cope with it are free to choose differently; switching back and forth between init systems is subject to whatever the maintainers come up, or CTTE if they don't, but switching should be possible and defined but not necessarily easy You may note I agree, in all of these proposed options, that we can change the default init system to our new default which CTTE has decided on, for both new and existing installations; I just require that the user is to be informed about it and can abort the upgrade if they do not wish the change (at debconf "medium" priority; I think about something like the linux-image packages do to prevent removal of the running kernel), and that the user has a defined way to switch between init systems. Thanks in advance, //mirabilos -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/lp6dlk$tvc$1...@ger.gmane.org
