Bug#765803: Status of prompting / notification on upgrade for init system switch?
]] Martin Pitt
> Tollef Fog Heen [2014-10-21 19:19 +0200]:
> > > I would be particularly interested in your take on the analysis that Steve
> > > Langasek posted to the debian-devel thread on why listing systemd-shim as
> > > the first alternative dependency for libpam-systemd makes sense and should
> > > not cause any negative effects for systemd users.
> > In a steady state, this would probably be ok. However, we've so far seen
> > two instances of -shim breaking for systemd users
> > (https://bugs.debian.org/746242 and https://bugs.debian.org/765101), by
> > shipping outdated security policies. We are worried that this will
> > happen again on future updates of systemd.
> 8-4 now eliminates the copied d-bus policy entirely. This was by and
> large a leftover when Ubuntu had the split systemd-services, and other
> than that there was one remaining delta in the policy which we
> discussed yesterday and found to be unnecessary (and detrimental).
That is good to hear. I'm hoping you're right there aren't any other
ways for it to regress for non-shim users.
> Of course there are still a lot of bug reports *in* -shim, i. e. which
> hit when you run with sysvinit or upstart. But that's the opposite
> case of what you were concerned about, right?
Tollef Fog Heen
UNIX is user friendly, it's just picky about who its friends are