Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-10-17 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Jonathan Nieder wrote: > In an ideal world, (i) would be enough [since it determines the > behavior] and packagers could experiment Just to be clear: I was reading from the point of view of what a packager of an ordinary daemon needs to do. But the requirements on init systems are important, too

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-10-17 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 02:19:12AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Maybe policy could allow (but discourage) packages that only support >> some non-Sys-V init system as long as they include a dependency >> indicating so? > > I don't think that's something that should

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-10-17 Thread Steve Langasek
Hi Jonathan, On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 02:19:12AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > > + tasks at boot time. However, any package integrating with other > > + init systems must also be backwards-compatible with > > + sysvinit by providing a SysV-style init script > > +

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-03-05 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Bill Allombert wrote: > On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 02:19:12AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >> Maybe policy could allow (but discourage) packages that only support >> some non-Sys-V init system as long as they include a dependency >> indicating so? > > This would be a terrible idea. We would end up w

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-03-05 Thread Bill Allombert
On Sat, Mar 05, 2011 at 02:19:12AM -0600, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Steve Langasek wrote: > > > Sorry this has taken so long; I spun my wheels on it > > for some time because I couldn't quite accept that there were so few > > additional requirements that needed to be specified here! > > T

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-03-05 Thread Jonathan Nieder
Hi, Steve Langasek wrote: > Sorry this has taken so long; I spun my wheels on it > for some time because I couldn't quite accept that there were so few > additional requirements that needed to be specified here! Thanks for your work. :) [...] > + tasks at boot time. However, any packa

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-01-15 Thread Steve Langasek
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 07:38:05PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:50:21AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 09:17:33PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > > What should packages do that want to have their script run > > > at that time? For sysvinit scripts

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-01-12 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 6:38 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:50:21AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 09:17:33PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: >> > A lot of the scripts currently in /etc/rcS.d/ come from the >> > initscripts package.  Is the alternative suppo

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-01-12 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:50:21AM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 09:17:33PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 08:10:04PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > > + method guaranteed to be supported by all init implementations. > > > An > > > +

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-01-11 Thread Steve Langasek
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 09:17:33PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote: > On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 08:10:04PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > Also, it's possible that some of the bits I've marked as upstart-specific > > will also be applicable to systemd and should be moved up a section. I'm > > not familiar

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-01-10 Thread Scott James Remnant
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Kurt Roeckx wrote: >> +          method guaranteed to be 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 >> +          imp

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-01-10 Thread Kurt Roeckx
On Sun, Jan 09, 2011 at 08:10:04PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > Also, it's possible that some of the bits I've marked as upstart-specific > will also be applicable to systemd and should be moved up a section. I'm > not familiar enough with the mechanics of systemd to say whether this is the > ca

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2011-01-09 Thread Steve Langasek
tags 591791 patch thanks Hi there, Attached is a tentative patch for this bug that documents what I think the requirements are both for alternative init systems in general, and for upstart in particular. Sorry this has taken so long; I spun my wheels on it for some time because I couldn't quite

Bug#591791: extend init.d policy to permit upstart jobs and describe their use

2010-08-05 Thread Steve Langasek
Package: debian-policy Severity: wishlist An action item from the upstart BoF today at DebConf is that policy language needs to be written around upstart jobs before we can start inflicting them on the archive. The following points should be addressed; they can be split into separate bug reports