[2019-07-06 08:49] Martin Steigerwald
> That said, I agree it would be good to find a way to inject runit
> symlinks into packages, cause I believe it to be unlikely that many
> Debian package maintainers would include runit support. However that
> said, I would.

True: most maintainers will not add runit support for their packages on
their own, since they are not interested and there is nothing in Debian
Policy to force them to do so.

But there is TC decision, that maintainers /should/
accept reasonable contributions that add support for alternative init
system. Given patience, they do.

Side note: in Policy sysvinit is still main init system, initscripts are
still (hopefully, forever) mandatory.

So inclusion of runit support is matter of manpower and patches. If
somebody is interested to help, nice places to start:

+ Bugs, user-tagged with `runscript' for `runit@???'
user[1]
+ runit bugs, and #930758 in particular: on testing in virtual machine
+ My work on testing of runscript upgrade via Docker:
- https://salsa.debian.org/kaction/daemons
- https://salsa.debian.org/kaction/acpid

I am sorry to say, but it is unlikely that runit support (service
directories) could be made in generic way, automatically, for following
reasons:

- sometimes you need more, then just execute daemon: you need to setup
directories, files, permissions, etc. See patch in #930113

- different daemons have different procedures to inhibit detaching from
tty.

- different daemons have different procedures to force logging on stdout.

Idea of converter/interpreter for systemd unit files is floating around,
but nobody produced anything usable so far.

[1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?which=tag&version=&dist=&data=runscript&users=runit@packages.debian.org&archive=no


--
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.