Simplification of init scripts can be done by replacing them with a
text file containing the following:
a) preliminary logic tests to verify whether daemon can be started
b) command to start daemon together with parameters
c) command to stop daemon with parameters if applicable

Only two lines will do as init scripts have essentially always the
same skeleton. Basically, they are some preliminary logic tests
followed by a case statement.

A generic executable can do execute these the above following the same
skeleton as init scripts. 'a' can be done away with if daemon
dependency management is somehow provided.

On 07/08/2015, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman@???> wrote:
> Alexey Rochev wrote
>> *Date: *2015-08-05 07:29 -400
>> *To: *dng
>> *Subject: *[DNG] Init scripts in packages
>> Currently Debian packages contains both systemd units and init scripts.
>> However, Debian developers refused to support several init systems. So
>> it's
>> only a matter of time when they remove init scripts from packages.
>> What will Devuan developers do when it happens? We can use sysvinit and
>> Devuan because these init scripts exist.
>
> It occurs to me that nobody raised the obvious questions:
>
> 1. Are we seeing upstream developers shipping systemd scripts, or
> systemd scripts w/o sysv init scripts? I'm not sure I have.
> 2. What the heck are Debian developers (packagers, actually), doing
> removing init scripts?
>
> Me, I've been installing key packages from upstream sources for years -
> avoids having to deal with out-of-date packages and such. (The basic
> environment is certainly easier to install and maintain via apt - but
> key production packages, hell no.)
>
> Miles Fidelman
>
>
> --
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
>