Steve Langasek wrote:
>> We should definitly continue to support oldstyle booting, at least for
>> the time being.
>
> Why?
>
> So far, the only bugs that have been highlighted in this thread appear to be
> bugs that happen when trying to remove insserv. If there aren't any
> problems with the new system, why do we need to support downgrading?
There are problems with the new system:
- it breaks other boot systems like file-rc.
- it was never properly discussed and accepted before. If we switch to a
dependency based boot system, why to this mess from SuSE called insserv? Why
don't I have the choice to stay with the old sys-rc way, as this is clearly what
I want to have as it just works and is plain easy to debug?
>> So you are telling us here that anyone who depends on the 20+ years
>> working method of ordering boot with decimal numbers is using a
>> regression? Sorry, but this is just plainly wrong.
>
> Not really. There are longstanding bugs with the sysv-rc approach that are
> never going to be fixed except by migrating to a new system designed with
> these problems in mind.
>
> The fact that symlinks have to be changed by hand whenever one daemon gains
> a dependency on another, possibly in cascading fashion, is one such bug.
That's indeed an issue, but one which was never a big problem to handle. So
which other issues do you see with sys-rc?
> I have seen that insserv does still have some rough patches at the moment,
> and I think these are documented in the BTS and I have every confidence that
> they will be addressed. But I think "insserv doesn't permit removal" is the
> least important of these.
Wrong.
--
Bernd Zeimetz Debian GNU/Linux Developer
GPG Fingerprints: 06C8 C9A2 EAAD E37E 5B2C BE93 067A AD04 C93B FF79
ECA1 E3F2 8E11 2432 D485 DD95 EB36 171A 6FF9 435F
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
