On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 16:01 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:48:04PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-09-05 at 13:52 -0400, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > > Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > > > No, that's not the true package relationship. There's no reason that
> > > > you should always get this added service by default when you install
> > > > a system with non-systemd init that doesn't need logind. Making this
> > > > a recommends would be a workaround for bad metadata in the
> > > > libpam-systemd package; we should fix that problem at its source the
> > > > right way.
>
> > > I filed bug #746578 against libpam-systemd back in May; I believe the
> > > proposed change (depend on systemd-shim | systemd-sysv rather than the
> > > other way around) addresses most if not all of this class of issues. It
> > > is currently WONTFIXed.
> > [...]
>
> > It's a bit counter-intuitive to have the default init system second, but
> > now that I think about it, I can see that it will do the right thing on
> > a jessie installation.
>
> > Upgrades from wheezy are the problem. Currently, upgrading sysvinit
> > should result in installing init and, unless upstart or sysvinit-core is
> > already installed, systemd-sysv. But if sysvinit and some rdep of
> > libpam-systemd are upgraded at the same time, and the order of
> > libpam-systemd's dependencies is switched, APT (or other package
> > manager) might consider it preferable to install sysvinit-core and
> > systemd-shim. Has this been tested?
>
> systemd-shim expresses no preference for init system, and is completely
> coinstallable with systemd-sysv - and should be a no-op when booting under
> systemd because the dbus name is already taken.
[...]
Sorry, I misread the Breaks field in systemd-shim (the version is higher
than the current version of systemd in unstable).
If I understand the last changelog entry correctly, systemd-shim can
also be built against a later version of systemd and should get the
right versioned Breaks. However, systemd-shim/experimental has been
built against systemd/unstable on i386, resulting in:
Package: systemd-shim
Version: 7-2exp1
Breaks: systemd (>= 209)
whereas on amd64 (maintainer build) it seems to have been built against
systemd/experimental and so has the intended:
Package: systemd-shim
Version: 7-2exp1
Breaks: systemd (<< 209)
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Experience is directly proportional to the value of equipment destroyed.
- Carolyn Scheppner
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part