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

Bug#746578: More systemd fallout :-/ [and 1 more messages]

Josh Triplett writes ("Bug#746578: More systemd fallout :-/ [and 1 more messages]"):
> Assuming that apt does the right thing with the dependencies reversed,
> yes.  I outlined several specific scenarios in my response to Steve's
> mail, which someone ought to test with a modified libpam-systemd
> package: new installs of jessie, installs of wheezy upgraded to jessie
> (with or without a package installed whose upgraded version depends on
> libpam-systemd), d-i (with and without selecting task-desktop), and
> debootstrap (with and without simultaneously installing libpam-systemd).

With respect, I don't necessarily think all those tests are necessary.

We know that with such a dependency apt won't install systemd-shim if
systemd is /already/ installed.  That leaves the upgrade case.  During
upgrade the change in dependency may result in systemd-shim being
installed as well as systemd, but that is harmless.

If it is not harmless then that is an RC bug in systemd-shim whose
effects on end users in jessie can be avoided by filing that bug and
preventing systemd-shim being in the release.  But so far this is
theoretical - AFAICT no-one has suggested that having systemd-shim
installed when systemd is in use is anything except harmless.


Reply to: