On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 01:06:00PM +0200, Soren Hansen wrote: > > But, if I'm not mistaking, there are things that unfortunately *have* > > to change, like the Ubuntu package using upstart-job.
> I've tried, several times, to explain to you that the dependency on > upstart-job exists *exclusively* in the binary packages, and it's put > there by dh_installinit. We don't have a hard dependency on upstart. If > Debian doesn't deal well with upstart, why does its dh_installinit let > upstart jobs take precedence over sysvinit style init scripts? This is my fault, I'm afraid. The initial proposed plan for integration of upstart support in Debian called for an "upstart-job" shim that would let sysvinit handle upstart jobs directly when upstart wasn't installed; this plan was abandoned, but not before debhelper picked up support for it. So currently, all packages that ship upstart jobs in Ubuntu carry a delta between Debian and Ubuntu (or do some fancy stepping in debian/rules to make the upstart job visible only under the right circumstances) because the upstart jobs can't be included in the Debian package. There is a patch for debhelper that will remove this constraint (i.e., both upstart jobs and sysvinit scripts will be installed /together/), but there's further groundwork to be applied in other packages before it should be included in the Debian archive. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
