Arguments for reopening #935304
Mark Hindley
mark at hindley.org.uk
Tue Sep 10 17:43:18 BST 2019
Colleagues,
Bug #935304 asking for libpam-systemd to relax its dependency on systemd-sysv
was closed today as wontfix. A fix for this is required to make it possible to
change from systemd to another init system smoothly without removing the Display
Manager and many desktop components.
I want to rehearse arguments for reopening and would welcome comments and
criticism.
Debian Policy 9.11 states that
'Packages may integrate with these replacement init systems by providing
implementation-specific configuration information about how and when to start a
service or in what order to run certain tasks at boot time. However, any
package integrating with other init systems must also be backwards-compatible
with sysvinit by providing a SysV-style init script with the same name as and
equivalent functionality to any init-specific job, as this is the only start-up
configuration method guaranteed to be supported by all init implementations.'
One possible argument is that by depending directly on systemd-sysv,
libpam-systemd is providing a direct systemd integration without a initscript.
It might also be possible to argue (silly though this sounds, I know) that
systemd ought to provide an initscript.
I look forward to any comments or other suggestions as to how to argue this.
Thanks
Mark
More information about the Debian-init-diversity
mailing list