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
