[RFC] plans for initscripts in F22
lnykryn at redhat.com
Fri Apr 25 11:06:13 UTC 2014
Dne 25.4.2014 02:19, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a):
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 04:38:07PM +0200, Lukáš Nykrýn wrote:
>> for the F22 I am planning some bigger changes regarding initscripts
>> and I would like to ask for comments.
>> Initscripts package was in the past a crucial part of the system.
>> They basicaly set up whole system during the boot. Currently
>> initscripts package contains "support" for initscripts
>> (/etc/init.d/function, service command), network initscripts and
>> tons of leftovers.
>> So my plan is following:
>> We must keep initscripts support, but I can imagine a setup where
>> every service uses a systemd unit, so this part does not have to be
>> installed by default, but could be pulled in as a dependency.
>> Network initscript. This will be probably the most controversial part.
>> In fedora 21 we will have three different tools for networking
>> (initscripts, NetworkManager and systemd-networkd) and all of them
>> will be installed by default. For various design reasons network
>> initscripts does not have any future (it is completely synchronous
>> and does not work with parallel boot very well). So I would like to
>> split it in its own package and drop it in the future. For most of
>> the use-cases NM is sufficient replacement and if somebody will miss
>> a static configuration we are planning to replace network initscript
>> functionality in networkd.
>> Than there are scripts and configs like
> This should be moved to cryptsetup or systemd, probably the latter.
> This should be moved to systemd, it is essentially a README. In
> addition, it contains outdated advice.
> + /var/run/utmp
> Those three could be picked up by systemd too. Even if the long-term
> plan is to get rid of them, systemd writes those files anyway.
> Also the sysctl stuff should be consumed by systemd:
> Can we have a joint initscripts + systemd release in a few days to
> change ownership of those files?
Sounds great. I will removed that from "upstream" and let you know.
>> I would like to find a new better home for them.
>> So I am suggesting to start with splitting initscripts to these
>> initscripts - initscripts support
>> initscripts-core (looking for better name) - the leftovers which
>> needs to by installed by default for now, but we will move
>> everything from it to different components
>> initscripts-network - network initscript
>> initscripts-readonly - support for readonly root should be
>> redesigned completelly
> I too think that this split is a lot of work for small gain. Working
> out the full dependencies set of what needs what is going to take a
> while, but I think it would be better to simply shrink the package to
> nothing in small steps.
The split is the first step to removal of those parts. So I don't plan
to maintain them for long :).
But main reason here is the network part. I would like to split it so we
could try if it does not mind for regular users, but still allow others
to install it if they really need it and give them some time to migrate
to another solution.
More information about the devel