Daniel,

Many thanks for your reply.

On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 03:32:23PM +0200, Daniel Baumann wrote:
> > It would be a great help to users of non-systemd inits if you could restore 
> > them.
> 
> thanks you for your report.
> 
> Personally I'm using systemd, but in general I fully agree that as long
> as it's no "burden" to keep the sysvinit scripts around, I'd keep them.
> 
> For mdadm specifically, using sysvinit scripts has been the source of a
> bunch of bugs as some things are not properly supportable when it comes
> to events/race-condition handling when detecting raid devices in early boot.

Could you be a little more specific as to what insurmountable issues still
persist?

> Most other distributions as well as upstream don't support sysvinit
> anymore in mdadm.

I have spent some time looking through the source and upstream documentation. I
can't find any mention that upstream supports only systemd. Can you point me to
it?

> I can see at least three disadvantages for keeping
> sysvinit scripts in mdadm around:
> 
>   * I would need to support them in Debian for a type of system I
>     don't use anywhere anymore since several Debian releases.
>     Personally, I'd rather spend time on, to me, more appealing things.
>
>   * Keeping sysvinit support for mdadm in Debian de-facto makes me
>     upstream for these scripts, which doesn't seem right given that
>     I don't use it myself.

I don't think I was asking you to do either of these. I was merely asking for
reinstatement of the existing scripts (which work) and accept and merge
reasonable and tested patches in the future. That seems a pretty small burden.

>   * Keeping sysvinit support would "falsly advertise" that it's actually
>     maintained and cared for, which isn't the case and I'd expect that
>     a lot of bugs don't get spottet in time for a next Debian release.

I am sure people who use mdadm with non-systemd init *do* care about it and will
be happy to identify and correct any issues.

> A solution could be for those that like to keep using sysvinit, to
> submit the scripts for inclusion in the orphan-sysvinit-scripts package
> and maintain it there.

Notwithstanding Matthew's great work in orphan-sysvinit-scripts, this is a
suboptimal solution.

 * The approach has inherent problems that are well documented[1]

 * If there *are* issues with mdadm running without systemd as PID1, this
   approach wouldn't solve or avoid them 

I hope you will reconsider.

With thanks and best wishes

Mark

[1]  
https://salsa.debian.org/matthew/orphan-sysvinit-scripts/-/blob/master/README.org

Reply via email to