On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 12:58:26AM +0200, Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote: > Source: zookeeper > Severity: wishlist > > > Hi. > > Is there any bigger reason for having the daemon split from its > init files? > > Most daemon packages in Debian don't do this, zookeeperd contains > only few small files so there is no real space benefit. > > > I have absolutely nothing against if you don't want to have the > daemon started just by installing the package, but this can also > be achieved with the init files in the main package :-) > > > At least zookeeperd should suggest zookeeperd. > > > Further, zookeeperd has a package description of: > >This package contains init.d scripts to start and stop zookeeper and starts > >zookeeper on installation. > however it also contains systemd and even still upstart init files > (the later can probably be dropped, now that upstream is dead).
Hi Chris, I don't know the history of why zookeeper and zookeeperd were split into separate packages, but I tend to agree that the separate daemon package isn't strictly needed. Maybe the idea was that a user might want to install the management tools on a system that isn't also a zk server, and that installing zookeeperd is the differentiating factor? Thank you for the bug report. Perhaps we can get some input from other users or developers. I will work on cleaning up the description and the init files in zookeeperd. Cheers, tony
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
