Bug#746578: Reasons to keep systemd-sysv as the first alternative
On Thu, 2014-09-18 at 17:14 -0700, Cameron Norman wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Josh Triplett <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Personally, in this case, I'd argue that the desirable dependency (which
> > we can't easily express) would be "sysvinit-core ? systemd-shim :
> > systemd-sysv".
> To be more precise, it would be "!systemd-sysv ? systemd-shim :
> systemd-sysv" so that other alternate inits are treated equally.
> As you hopefully can see, this can be condensed to "systemd-sysv ?
> systemd-sysv : systemd-shim" AKA "systemd-shim | systemd-sysv" :)
You completely missed the point, which was to distinguish between
systems that have explicitly installed the new use-sysvinit-as-init
package and systems that only use sysvinit because they have not yet
upgraded to the new default. Neither of those have systemd-sysv
installed, thus your version does not work.
>From another mail:
> If the transition is already happening, why have the dependency be
> like it is anyway? User's systems will be switched regardless, so
> there is no use in having a second pass at changing the init.
For partial upgrades.