#1039141 bucardo: ships sysv-init script without systemd unit

#1039141#5
Date:
2023-06-25 22:20:23 UTC
From:
To:
Dear Maintainer(s),

bucardo has been flagged by Lintian as shipping a sysv-init script
without a corresponding systemd unit file. The default init system in
Debian is systemd, and so far this worked because a transitional
sysv-init-to-unit generator was shipped by systemd. This is in the
process of being deprecated and will be removed by the time Trixie
ships, so the remaining packages that ship init scripts without
systemd units will stop working.

There are various advantages to using native units, for example the
legacy generator cannot tell the different between a oneshot service
and a long running daemon. Also, sanboxing and security features
become available for services. For more information, consult the
systemd documentation:
https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/systemd.unit.html

You can find the Lintian warning here:

https://lintian.debian.org/sources/bucardo

In case this is a false positive, please add a Lintian override to
silence it and then close this bug.

Thanks!

#1039141#10
Date:
2025-10-15 15:24:56 UTC
From:
To:
Dear Maintainer(s) of affected packages, these bugs have been open for
more than 2 years now. Policy was updated to make units mandatory for
system services. The removal of compat with sysv-init scripts from
systemd has been postponed from trixie to forky, but it is now
approaching. In approximately a month's time, this should hit
unstable, if everything goes well.

Therefore in order to ensure the remaining bugs do not fall through
the cracks I am raising severity again, as there is a very high chance
the affected packages will stop working as intended in about a month's
time in the default setup.

As already mentioned in the original bug report, if your package is
not intended to work as a systemd service or under systemd at all,
please feel free to downgrade or close+wontifx or anything else as you
see fit. The severity raising is not intended to make anyone support
scenarios they don't wish to support, but simply to ensure attention
is given to the issue, even if just to close+wontfix. Also the bugs
were opened based on Lintian reports, and it is possible that there
might be false positives.

Thanks for your work and understanding.

#1039141#17
Date:
2025-11-03 11:28:39 UTC
From:
To:
Re: bluca@debian.org

I think we should remove bucardo from unstable. The last upstream
release was 2020 and it doesn't look like that's going to change.
There were some git commits, but issues and pull requests are not
being attended to.

Christoph

#1039141#22
Date:
2026-01-09 12:40:15 UTC
From:
To:
Dear submitter,

as the package bucardo has just been removed from the Debian archive
unstable we hereby close the associated bug reports.  We are sorry
that we couldn't deal with your issue properly.

For details on the removal, please see https://bugs.debian.org/1122803

The version of this package that was in Debian prior to this removal
can still be found using https://snapshot.debian.org/.

Please note that the changes have been done on the master archive and
will not propagate to any mirrors until the next dinstall run at the
earliest.

This message was generated automatically; if you believe that there is
a problem with it please contact the archive administrators by mailing
ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org.

Debian distribution maintenance software
pp.
Thorsten Alteholz (the ftpmaster behind the curtain)