[2019-09-28 10:04] Sean Whitton <spwhit...@spwhitton.name> > Hello, > > On Sat 28 Sep 2019 at 04:18PM +00, Dmitry Bogatov wrote: > > > Reasonable. Then let's drop part about Depends: > > > > [ ... All packages with daemons must provide init.d scripts ...], > > unless software is only usable, by upstream's design, when > > pid1 is provided by some other init system. > > I think this would work. What do you think, David? > > Dmitry, perhaps you could work up a patch against policy.git.
From 629b6fd334806e5389e3cfee44997d95ac96501c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dmitry Bogatov <kact...@debian.org> Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2019 18:53:36 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Policy: Allow missing init.d script for services, specific to other init Wording: Dmitry Bogatov <kact...@disroot.org> Closes: #932704 --- policy/ch-opersys.rst | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/policy/ch-opersys.rst b/policy/ch-opersys.rst index 3e685cf..309d6fe 100644 --- a/policy/ch-opersys.rst +++ b/policy/ch-opersys.rst @@ -1006,7 +1006,9 @@ supported by all init implementations. An exception to this rule is scripts or jobs provided by the init implementation itself; such jobs may be required for an implementation-specific equivalent of the ``/etc/rcS.d/`` scripts and may not have a one-to-one correspondence -with the init scripts. +with the init scripts. Another exception is when software is only +usable, by upstream's design, when pid1 is provided by some other init +system. .. _s-upstart: -- Note, that I send and fetch email in batch, once in a few days. Please, mention in body of your reply when you add or remove recepients.
