:: Re: [DNG] Cockpit removal might mak…
Pàgina inicial
Delete this message
Reply to this message
Autor: Olaf Meeuwissen
Data:  
A: Mark Hindley
CC: g4sra, dng\@lists.dyne.org
Assumpte: Re: [DNG] Cockpit removal might make sense
Hi Mark (and everyone else on the list!),

Mark Hindley writes:

> On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 07:03:16PM +0000, g4sra via Dng wrote:
>> Is this the rule for all packages that have dependency on SystemD for some functionality ?
>
> My personal opinion on this is yes.


Add mine!

> Non systemd init is still possible in Debian. So it appears some
> current versions of cockpit will not work on a Debian system with
> sysvinit, runit or openrc. To my mind, that makes it a Debian bug that
> should be fixed there with an explicit dependency.


As long as systemd is not `Essential: yes` (or `Priority: required`),
anything that doesn't work without it needs to add a `Depends:`. But
you already mentioned that below :-)

FTR, for buster, bullseye and sid and as of writing, systemd is
`Priority: important`, see

https://sources.debian.org/src/systemd/247.3-5/debian/control/

(for bullseye and sid).

>> I was under the impression that missing dependencies from Debian
>> packages was to be expected, and that it was not considered
>> 'important' by some of the Debian devs. That was a while ago though
>> (Lenny ?)...maybe opinions have changed.
>
> Again, my take on this is that In Debian, systemd is the default, but it is
> still not Essential in the Debian Policy technical sense.[1] Therefore packages
> (in this case cockpit) must explicitly depend on packages (in this case systemd
> or systemd-sysv) they require to function[2]. Debian Policy mandates this as a
> 'must', so not complying should be an RC bug.


Seeing that bullseye is in freeze, reporting this as an RC bug might
actually get it fixed :-P ...
On the other hand, you might just be perceived as a jerk/nitpick ...
and get your bug downgraded because the maintainer wants to have it
included in bullseye anyway.

> However, as we have seen, some DDs are very quick to quote the Policy when it
> suits them and will ignore it when it is inconvenient...


Like I said :-)

> [1] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#essential-packages
>
> [2] https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html#dependencies


Hope this helps,
--
Olaf Meeuwissen, LPIC-2            FSF Associate Member since 2004-01-27
 GnuPG key: F84A2DD9/B3C0 2F47 EA19 64F4 9F13  F43E B8A4 A88A F84A 2DD9
 Support Free Software                        https://my.fsf.org/donate
 Join the Free Software Foundation              https://my.fsf.org/join