Bug#1084924: The system-log-daemon virtual package

[Helmut Grohne]

Hi Sean,

On Thu, Nov 07, 2024 at 10:37:22AM +0800, Sean Whitton wrote:
> Helmut, I think my conversation with you is somewhat verging into
> detailed design work.  We don't want the TC to be trying to decide
> exactly what sort of containers we want to support; we just want to be
> sure we're not definitely blocking anything we don't want to
> definitively block.

I respectfully disagree with your characterization. I used the podman
example to demonstrate actual use of the underlying concept that a
container runtime would be responsible for providing logging services
and concluded that a dependency on logging services would no longer be
expressible in our dependency system. To me, this is not yet design
work. Rather we would be shifting to a state where logging services are
always assumed available and all that we would continue to maintain is
the exclusion mechanism.

> So, I think my proposal (to the extent it too is not design work) still
> stands as a resolution to the bug.  I'll write to Ian about it off-list
> to see if he agrees.

I have little doubts that Ian would agree with your proposal. I do have
severe doubts that systemd maintainers would agree with it though. So
the ones to talk to first would be systemd maintainers in my view. Given
my current understanding of the matter, I'd vote your proposal below
NOTA, because I think that it leaves an important use case unaddressed.

Indeed, we can lift Bastian's mail into a proper proposal. Logging
services are generally assumed to be available. It becomes the
responsibility of the init system or container runtime. The
system-log-daemon virtual package mainly serves as an exclusion
mechanism. Alternative init systems such as sysvinit-core should issue a
dependency or recommendation on it.

Helmut