On 04/03/2013 04:42 PM, Yamaban wrote:
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013 09:20, Ludwig Nussel
wrote: Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 02.04.2013 10:06, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 11:29:22PM -0300, Cristian Rodríguez wrote:
Does anyone have access to a full unpacked tree of factory and can post what packages contain init scripts but not service files so I can take look at them ? there is no rpmlint check for that :-|
And not long ago I was being assured there won't be...
We agreed not to enforce that. So your fine to have a package with init scripts. But it's perfectly fine also to have a rpmlint warning that a package has *only* init script and Cristian adding systemd services for them - if the maintainer of the package disagrees to add it, then we can talk again.
Well, the truth is that it doesn't make much sense anymore to keep the sysv scripts if there is a service file. It only adds potential code duplication and confusion. So I'd vote for having either .service files or init scripts in a package but not both. However, adding service files that break previous features or just add the init script shell code 1:1 as ExecStartPre should be avoided too.
As long as there is a SLE(S|D) without systemd support you are shooting your own legs if you just "drop" all replaced sysVinit scripts.
Only as long as packages are build for SLE 11 - and many are not.
For systems with full systemd support (12.1 and later), install the scrips as %doc in the docdir for reference (and help).
Before a drop could be considered (13.1 and following), there is more maturing needed (intoduce a .service, and get it working without troubles for a full release, e.g. a 'new' .service in 12.3 gets a moved /etc/init.d/ script as %doc in 13.1 and so on.
No, this is really overkill in this case. Service files are not that complicated and can be easily tested.
Similar in SLE, afer one run in a SLE service pack it could be considered to move the scripts, but what of those that modified the scripts to suit their needs?
That's why you're not doing this during the lifetime of SLE 11 but introduce it directly with e.g. SLE 12.
I agree, that keeping the old sysVinit scripts beyond the end-of-life of the last sysVinit supporting SLE version (12?, 11 for sure) does not make sense, but before?
Are you trying to get the SLE support crew mad at you?
You don't need to worry about that, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg) GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-packaging+owner@opensuse.org