> While the headers have existed, they have historically been underutilized and thus poorly maintained. They are human-readable, so even if no tool used them,

> While the headers have existed, they have historically been underutilized and thus poorly maintained. They are human-readable, so even if no tool used them, they still have an effect. Someone might read the header and incorrectly move the service in their sequential boot order, for example. Would you recommend that the person reading the header also "fix themselves" instead of fixing the header or filing a bug against whomever owns the incorrect file? > Thus a newcomer can't just walk in and suddenly make them massively important while claiming the breakages that come out of it is not their problem. Someone decided to put the two things together, right? Someone combined this "newcomer" and these old files with the bad headers? The onus should be on that person to make things right, not the tool which is using the headers correctly. It could be a distribution, for example, but it isn't the tool. Update them or remove them if they are wrong. Why campaign to leave them intact and incorrect?