systemd unit files are working, but msgcollector, sdwdate and whonixcheck are not enabled by default yet.
Seems like making packages systemd-only is non-standard and causing this issue.
* Now talking on #debian-systemd
* Topic for #debian-systemd is: user tagged bugs: http://deb.li/335K7 | wiki: http://wiki.debian.org/systemd | http://people.debian.org/~stapelberg/dashboard/ | please contribute: https://etherpad.fr/p/systemd-best-practices | SysV compat and upgrade issues: https://debian.titanpad.com/23
* Topic for #debian-systemd set by email@example.com at Fri Oct 24 14:54:44 2014
<adrelanos> hi! do you know any example packages, that are systemd only, that do not ship a sysvinit script?
<mbiebl> adrelanos: there are packages, which systemd units but no sysv init script
<yrro> systemd-cron perhaps?
<mbiebl> upower is such an example
<mbiebl> but those are started via different means under sysvinit
<mbiebl> i.e. directly by dbus-daemon
<mbiebl> other then that, I'm not aware of any package which does not support to be run under sysvinit
<mbiebl> adrelanos: why do you ask?
<adrelanos> trying to port a package to systemd. the original plan was making it systemd-only, not maintaining the sysvinit script anymore.
<adrelanos> but it seems we're trying something very unusual and should rethink this
<yrro> is there something unusual about the service? e.g., a sysvinit script that tries to manage multiple instances or something?
<yrro> i've bashed my head against too many of those for one lifetime... :)
<adrelanos> no, just a lintian warning and too little time
<mbiebl> adrelanos: keep in mind, that existing packages do typically have sysvinit scripts
<adrelanos> fear of conflicts sysinit script vs systemd also
<mbiebl> for new packages, it's indeed going to be interesting, who is going to maintain them
<mbiebl> i.e., rely on bug reporters / sysvinit supporters to provide them
<mbiebl> similar to how ports are handled (in theory)
<mbiebl> atm I would provide a sysvinit script along with the systemd unit
<mbiebl> if you name them the same, systemd will pick the native unit file
<adrelanos> alright. will do.
<mbiebl> so there shouldn't be any conflict
<fsateler> adrelanos: see man 5 init-d-script , it should simplify maintainance of simple sysv services
<yrro> as long as it's a native executable ;)
<adrelanos> as upstream, is it good to have 'make install' install /etc/init.d/pkg and /lib/systemd/system/pkg.service?
<algernon> second: yes, first: only if it doesn't exist (no overwrite)
<mbiebl> adrelanos: it's hard, shipping a sysv init script which works decently everywhere
<mbiebl> so I probably wouldn't bother
<mbiebl> shipping a native systemd unit is actually something systemd upstream pushes for
<mbiebl> adrelanos: please see also "man 7 daemon"
<mbiebl> section " Installing Systemd Service Files"
<ansgar> adrelanos: You should use the pkg-config path to install stuff upstream. Not everyone uses /lib/systemd/system ;)