Re: Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile
- Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 13:42:32 +0000
- From: Simon McVittie <smcv@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile
On Sat, 06 Jan 2018 at 05:18:09 +0100, Simon Richter wrote:
> We still need a non-systemd ecosystem for everything that is out of
> scope for systemd.
If this is important to you (and when I say "you" here I mean
everyone who agrees with that statement, not just you personally), then
src:sysvinit and the ecosystem around it could really benefit from your
help. initscripts currently has an RC bug open, its most recent maintainer
upload was almost a year ago, and most of the uploads in the last couple
of years were from systemd maintainers keeping it on life-support;
systemd-shim is unmaintained upstream and in Debian; cgmanager is
unmaintained upstream and RFA in Debian; and libnih is unmaintained
upstream and in Debian (and currently uninstallable and fails to rebuild,
although there's a patch in the BTS for that).
In the longer term, elogind (a standalone fork of systemd-logind)
might well be a more sustainable way to provide systemd-logind APIs on
sysvinit-booted systems than the current approach of combining the current
systemd-logind with systemd-shim, an incomplete emulation of the systemd
manager (pid 1) that needs to keep up with whatever manager APIs logind
currently makes use of. After all, it seems more likely that third-party
software can cope with an old version of the logind APIs than that
systemd-logind can cope with an old version of the systemd manager API,
when logind and the manager are normally part of the same source tree
and so are upgraded together.
Either way, if you want sysvinit (and the stack around it) to continue to
be supported, it's necessary for someone who thinks the same way to do
the work to support it. Expecting the rest of Debian (and in particular
the systemd maintainers, ironically) to keep propping up sysvinit is
not really sustainable.