[DRE-maint] unicorn: native systemd service

[Dmitry Smirnov]

On Wed, 24 Jun 2015 12:02:46 Hleb Valoshka wrote:
> On 6/23/15, Dmitry Smirnov <onlyjob at debian.org> wrote:
> >> It seems that --update-rcd-params=disable (or remove) is the solution.
> > 
> > I tried that but it does not work and produces error on installation of
> > the package...
> 
> I'll test it too when I have more spare time, and if it's broken then
> I'll fill bug against dh.

I any case code that I've committed successfully disables service on first 
install. We just need to implement soft restart. I'll try to draft an utility 
as soon as I'll manage to allocate some time for it.


> >> And of course I don't want to lose features just because of systemd.
> > 
> > Right but at least we need to make sure that custom restart code is
> > systemd-aware...
> 
> Does debian's systemd package has invoke-rc.d? OpenRC has.

Not sure... I know systemd can invoke init.d script but only standard {start|
stop|restart|status} functions and only with the absence of native .service 
file.


> It's usual way to add custom actions to init script besides usual
> start, stop, reload, restart. Because init script is a interface
> between user (sysadmin) and daemon. I don't wonder that lennarts don't
> know this. For example, apache's init even can start/stop cache
> cleaner.

It is not that usual to add custom actions. I've seen many init.d s scripts 
and only few had such things. I think systemd was designed using different 
philosophy. I don't know the history but it could be that limited systemd 
interface to services is quite intentional. Frankly it is annoying when init.d 
script does too much but we can avoid this by offering an additional utility 
to do soft restart and you can call it from init.d script as well if you wish.


> > Perhaps it will be best to introduce a new binary that user could run on
> > upgrade to do "zero downtime restart" (we can run this utility from
> > postinst).
> > What do you think?
> 
> I thought about shell library sourced by both. But then decided to
> move to init script may be first idea was better.

Shell script could be common and independent from init system. It should be 
easier to test and debug as well...


> > It is our problem because like it or not Debian is now "married" to
> > systemd.
> 
> I dislike the way it was "married"

You have to get over it. It was debated enough and Technical Committee has 
decided. You still can use init.d if you wish, can you?


> , it quite similar to the last
> "marriage" in Chechnya (old police bastard and young girl), so I don't
> want to support this.

I do not know this story but from the way you've described it I'm sure that 
your analogy is very inaccurate and unfair. I'm worried about such attitude of 
yours. There are things we may not like. For instance I do not like GNOME (so 
naturally I do not use it) but I don't need to demonise it (e.g. declare it 
"Evil" etc.) to justify my preference.


> > Remember that it is not users' fault to use default init system so let's
> > try to offer a solution for them.
> 
> User can always apt-get install better init.

Let's not go there. As maintainer you can't care only about those users who 
happened to be using Unicorn on your favourite init system. That kind 
hostility is harmful. Please do not discriminate.

-- 
Cheers,
 Dmitry Smirnov.

---
Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual
ignorance.
        -- H. L. Mencken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers/attachments/20150625/b85d3021/attachment.sig>