On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 12:17:06PM +0100, Raymond Wooninck wrote:
My understanding from Tomas is that he just wants to implement a rpmlint message that indicates that the package does not contain any systemd scripts despite that it has a number of init scripts.
Read the subject, please. It clearly says "failing build".
Nowhere it has been said that the package is not allowed to have initscripts, just that openSUSE would like to move on and ensure that every package that has initscripts also has systemd unit files.
In one of the old discussions, Coolo mentioned adding a check that package doesn't have both. That's something I would understand as installing both and using only one is confusing (as I experienced recenty with amavisd-new).
I for one would very much welcome this as that I don't think that using the display-manager initscript is really reflecting the current situation. A lot of display-managers upstream have already been ported to systemd unit files and we are actually removing them, just to keep something "hackish" in place.
I believe it should be up to the package maintainers which one they want to include and - more importantly - which one they want to maintain and support. Only if there are more maintainers (or people willing to maintain a package) who do not agree, distribution managers should step in as arbiters.
We either start moving towards the future
Then we might start with not having ifconfig and friends (obsolete since kernel 2.2, i.e. 1999) or even rarp (no chance of working since kernel support was dropped in 2.3, i.e. 2001) in default installation. I once suggested that we might at least move those to a separate package which wouldn't be installed by default. Was the response "Great, let's add a check for those who still use them."? No, it was "No, we can't do that, there are still scripts using them. Rather audit all the packages, find who is using the tools and submit requests." I took it as fair point, we don't want to break things and we don't want to disturb package maintainers. If you want to get rid of obsolete tools, it's your responsibility to clean up the mess and handle the fallout. But now, when it comes to init scripts which are still officially supported way of starting services and which were needed until 12.2 (supported until January 2014), the approach proposed is to add a hard check (again, "failing build") and make package maintainers responsible for everything. Doesn't it look like a double standard?
and ensure that we are delivering a strong distribution or we just keep living in the past with the knowledge that one day openSUSE no longer exists as a distribution because its lost its relevance.
Personally, I'm afraid that a community distribution like openSUSE is more likely to lose its relevance by eager embracing of every new systemd-whateverd thrown at us and replacing its tools by those. I really don't think green wallpapers (actually, more black than green these days) and YaST would be enough to make the distribution stand out and attract people (both passive users and contributors) to it. I'm not saying keeping or dropping init scripts does much difference here. But dropping all our improvements and extensions (se this thread for an example) in favour of unification with other distributions is one small step in this general direction. And forcing maintainers who don't want to do it themselves (for whatever reason) is not going to help either. Michal Kubeček -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org