Hello Russ Allbery, On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 10:38:02PM -0800, Russ Allbery wrote: [...] > We should be coming up with a documented way of disabling a service and > put that in Policy, and provide a recommendation for people to use that > instead of all the other mechanisms that currently exist but don't play > well with various things. That would include recommending *against* the > ENABLED anti-pattern. That's why I've been keeping this bugs open and > around, not wontfix.
Thanks for the feedback. Fwiw, I mostly wanted to reference the other very similar bug (and some of the conclusion from it) since they where so similar. So that people would not miss one when reading the other. > > This is mostly just documenting update-rc.d disable in Policy, except that > we need to document how to keep a service from ever being enabled and > started by installation of a package by doing something to the system > *before* the package is installed. This is very important for, say, build > environments and other bootstrapping environments. (And we have a > mechanism now for this, namely policy.d; it's just not documented in > Policy.) Since policy still hasn't caught up with anything except init scripts and this still having sharp edges left (in real life, not policy) even after all this years I was under the impression that this would basically get outsourced into the practical sphere and not be in policy for long time to come. Thanks for the feedback. Also see https://bugs.debian.org/709384 for discussion on how to implement this right, so policy can get it right before dh_installinit does. ;) (I assume you're already familiar with the --no-start and --no-enable from dh-systemd which lately dh_installinit is being fixed up to match, if that somehow helps here or planning for the future.) Regards, Andreas Henriksson
