[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#727708: Processed: block 726763 with 727708

On Tue, 2014-02-04 at 16:53 +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 02, 2014 at 12:57:39PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> > You mean, like installing the systemd-sysv package?
> Indeed; but people earlier in this thread have said that this isn't the
> preferred approach, so I was arguing that this *should* be the preferred
> approach in Debian if systemd is selected as the default, rather than
> having helper packages that have to wander around fiddling with the
> configuration of half a dozen different boot loaders to point them to
> the right place.
> If the people whose comments I was reading weren't accurately reflecting
> the position of the Debian systemd maintainers, then I apologise for
> misunderstanding.

The main issue is that systemd-sysv conflicts with sysvinit-core, while
the systemd package doesn't. If you do the first install of systemd with
systemd-sysv, this doesn't only change the default, but forces the
removal of the whole sysvinit implementation. This can be compared to a
kernel package install that forces the removal of all previously
installed kernels before you can boot to the new one.

So the systemd-sysv route has the clear technical disadvantage that it
does not support parallel installation of sysvinit and systemd. I think
the ability to easily switch back to sysvinit for troubleshooting if you
encounter issues does have some value. Of course, it would be possible
to switch /sbin/init while both are installed.

Reply to: