Response to active removal of initscripts

[Tito]

On 7/29/20 2:48 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Jul 2020, Trek wrote:
> 
>> another viable option may be to create a package suffixed with -init,
> 
> Either way, separate packages have the problem of migrating
> the conffiles from one to the other. This can be extremely
> tricky to get right, so users might lose their settings in
> between, or packages can be uninstallable due to file con‐
> flicts.
> 
> Separate packages have an even higher load on the mirrors
> and ftpmasters, but a combined package has more problems:
> version skew, both cross-architecture (e.g. if some buildd
> hasn’t caught up yet on an arch, or if a package breaks on
> an arch temporarily) and in backports(!).
> 
> IMHO the only really sustainable way is to keep the init
> scripts in the packages themselves and maintain them to‐
> gether with the package maintainer. This probably should
> be forced as much as maintainers are forced to add systemd
> units to their packages (that is, not much right now, but
> will change).

Hi,
yes let's hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.

"Si vis pacem para bellum"

Ciao,
Tito

> bye,
> //mirabilos
>