ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: David Paleino <d.paleino@gmail.com>

(CCing debian-devel@ for comments on this)

* Package name : initng
Version : 0.6.10.2
Upstream Author : Jimmy Wennlund <jimmy.wennlund@gmail.com>
Ismael Luceno <ismael@initng.org>
* URL : http://www.initng.org/
* License : GNU GPL v2+
Programming Lang: C
Description : full replacement of the old sysvinit init system


Hi,
I'd like to reintroduce into Debian the initng package, since I've been using
it for years and it didn't cause too much problems (yet, it's not as stable as
sysvinit during upgrades, but does its job).

It has been removed some time ago from the archive:

================================================== =======================
[Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:58:03 +0000] [ftpmaster: Joerg Jaspert] Removed the
following packages from experimental:

initng | 0.3.0-1 | arm, powerpc, s390
initng | 0.5.2-1 | source, alpha, hppa, i386, ia64, m68k, mips, mipsel,
sparc Closed bugs: 435127

------------------- Reason -------------------
RoM: obsolete; inactive upstream; buggy
----------------------------------------------
================================================== =======================

I'd like to argument on those reasons.

Firstly, it's not obsolete, since we only have sysvinit available (if we had
upstart, or something similar to initng, I could've agreed here -- and upstart
in Debian is way more experimental than initng).

Secondly, upstream isn't "inactive". It has just slown down a bit; a fact is the
release of initng-ifiles just yesterday (Apr 13, 2008).

Thirdly, it's not that buggy. I've been using it since version 0.3.$something
(I believe; well, it's been a long time ago), and it didn't give me much
problems. Sometimes happened that an upgrade failed (probably it could be
handled better via postinst), so I had to reboot with sysvinit to fix
things up (both systems can cohexist! :)).

I'm thus filing an ITP for initng (I'll soon file one for initng-ifiles, since
they have different sources). I've CCed debian-devel@lists.debian.org for
comments on this ITP.

Kindly,
David

--
. '`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

* David Paleino [Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:26:08 +0200]:

> it didn't give me much
> problems. Sometimes happened that an upgrade failed (probably it could be
> handled better via postinst), so I had to reboot with sysvinit to fix
> things up (both systems can cohexist! :)).

Uh. That doesn't sound suitable for unstale; upload to experimental
until such problems are completely gone.

Cheers,

--
Adeodato Simó dato at net.com.org.es
Debian Developer adeodato at debian.org

Listening to: The Wallflowers - Another one in the dark


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:48:26 +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:

> * David Paleino [Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:26:08 +0200]:
>
> > it didn't give me much
> > problems. Sometimes happened that an upgrade failed (probably it could be
> > handled better via postinst), so I had to reboot with sysvinit to fix
> > things up (both systems can cohexist! :)).
>
> Uh. That doesn't sound suitable for unstale; upload to experimental
> until such problems are completely gone.

I know what you mean. Maybe I wasn't too clear: some problems happened when I
booted with, let's say, 0.5.*, and upgraded to 0.6.*, it tried to shutdown the
system using the 0.6.* scripts. Now I don't really see these problems
happen anymore, they should have gone away: that's why initng-ifiles exists
(once the scripts were tightly connected to the core). (or, probably, they
happen when there's a major upgrade, i.e. from 0.x to 0.y)

Thanks for your reply,
David

--
. '`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:48:26 +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:

> * David Paleino [Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:26:08 +0200]:
>
> > it didn't give me much
> > problems. Sometimes happened that an upgrade failed (probably it could be
> > handled better via postinst), so I had to reboot with sysvinit to fix
> > things up (both systems can cohexist! :)).
>
> [..] upload to experimental until such problems are completely gone.

Forgot to say, I perfectly agree to upload to experimental for quite some time.
Yet I believe that experimental doesn't give the widest audience of
possible testers (let's say it: bug-catchers); I believe that uploading to
unstable (and than letting the migration to testing be blocked by filed bugs)
would be better. But probably this is another question :)

Cheers,
David

--
. '`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

David Paleino wrote:



Firstly, it's not obsolete, since we only have sysvinit available (if we had
upstart, or something similar to initng, I could've agreed here -- and upstart
in Debian is way more experimental than initng).


I doubt you can back up this claim. My experiences with both initng and
upstart have taught me the opposite. upstart was way more reliable and
mature.


One reason is, that the current version of upstart in experimental still
uses the sysv init scripts. This is by design though, so you can have a
smooth transition.


initng doesn't offer something similar.

With initng you have to replace everything and reconfigure your complete
boot system (I know that there is a tool in initng which tries to guess
which services to use and activates those ifiles, which is fragile at best).


The reason why upstart is in experimental is different (unresolved issue
about sysvinit being essential and upstart conflicting with it).


But claiming that initng was more mature than upstart (or upstart way
more experimental) is FUD, sorry.



Cheers,
Michael

--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 13:14:57 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:

> David Paleino wrote:
>
> > Firstly, it's not obsolete, since we only have sysvinit available (if we had
> > upstart, or something similar to initng, I could've agreed here -- and
> > upstart in Debian is way more experimental than initng).
>
> I doubt you can back up this claim. My experiences with both initng and
> upstart have taught me the opposite. upstart was way more reliable and
> mature.

I can't really back up my claim; it was just my experience after an apt-get
install upstart :)

> One reason is, that the current version of upstart in experimental still
> uses the sysv init scripts. This is by design though, so you can have a
> smooth transition.

This is great, thanks for the info.

> [..]
>
> The reason why upstart is in experimental is different (unresolved issue
> about sysvinit being essential and upstart conflicting with it).

Probably this broke my system when I installed upstart. Going to read upstart's
bug page.

> But claiming that initng was more mature than upstart (or upstart way
> more experimental) is FUD, sorry.

I didn't mean to, sorry. It was just my one-day-experience. I'm happy that
there's something more mature than initng then! :)

Thanks,
David

--
. '`. Debian maintainer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
: :' : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
`. `'` GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
`- 2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

David Paleino wrote:

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 13:14:57 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:


David Paleino wrote:


Firstly, it's not obsolete, since we only have sysvinit available (if we had
upstart, or something similar to initng, I could've agreed here -- and
upstart in Debian is way more experimental than initng).
I doubt you can back up this claim. My experiences with both initng and
upstart have taught me the opposite. upstart was way more reliable and
mature.


I can't really back up my claim; it was just my experience after an apt-get
install upstart :)


I'd be very interested in a bug report.


Cheers,
Michael


--
Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the
universe are pointed away from Earth?

ITP: initng -- full replacement of the old sysvinit init system
 

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 12:26:08 +0200, David Paleino wrote:

[...]

> Firstly, it's not obsolete, since we only have sysvinit available (if
> we had upstart, or something similar to initng, I could've agreed
> here -- and upstart in Debian is way more experimental than initng).

There are also minit, daemontools, and runit. At least the last 2
packages are stable.

Regards,
Tino


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org