Idea for migrating packages away from static boot sequence numbers

Henrique de Moraes Holschuh hmh at
Sat Sep 19 22:48:23 UTC 2009

On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Henrique de Moraes Holschuh]
> > I like the idea.  But it has to do the right thing when the package
> > gets installed in a non-dependency-based system if it is going to be
> > implemented before dependency-based becomes mandatory.
> Yes, dependency-based boot ordering is going to become mandatory, and
> that is the premise for this idea.  In Squeeze it will be possible to
> keep the old boot ordering for systems upgraded from Lenny.  We should
> drop support for it in Squeeze+1 and make it clear that it is no
> longer optional to switch to dependency based boot sequencing.
> The alternative is to force all package maintainers to guess on
> sequence numbers, and that do not make sense.
> > And yes, I am *all* for dependency-based ordering to be mandatory.
> Good.  Lets drop support for the legacy boot ordering when Squeeze is
> released.

Then, let's wait for Squeeze to be released before we add this feature.

  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh

More information about the initscripts-ng-devel mailing list