[Pkg-sysvinit-devel] Two line init.d scripts? Sure, that will work!

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Thomas Goirand]
>> Yeah, I discovered that OpenRC had a similar approach, but without
>> staying compatible with our current set of scripts in /etc/init.d/.
>
> [1] Sorry... what?!? :)
>
> It's perfectly compatible. You just decide what you want to
> (re-)implement or not. In fact, that's one of the very strong point of
> OpenRC: it allows a very smooth migration away from sysv-rc, where one
> can decide what to re-write or not.

I realise I was a bit unclear.  I mean that openrc scripts can not be
used with sysv-rc and file-rc (or systemd or upstart), not that openrc
is unable to handle LSB compatible init.d scripts.  So a package
providing a openrc script will not be started on a system using
sysv-rc, if I understand it correctly.  Did I misundertand this?  I
realise openrc can handle all the existing init.d scripts with LSB
headers just fine.

> Since last summer, OpenRC has full support for LSB headers. Also, I
> believe that OpenRC is the only init system replacement which allows
> to mix dependencies with LSB or it's own implementation.

That is not the case.  Both systemd and upstart allow this as well.

>> This approach also make it easier to identify the "simple" init.d
>> scripts, and possibly also make it easier to integrate them with for
>> example systemd and upstart by providing a replacement for the
>> init-d-script script or by extending init-d-script.
>
> Unfortunately, it doesn't, because there will be problems with
> dependencies, as much as I understand.

Yes, different name spaces will be a challenge.  But it can be handled
by deciding to keep the name spaces in sync, using the same name for
the same service in LSB headers, upstart jobs and systemd jobs.

--
Happy hacking
Petter Reinholdtsen