Bug#883573: Reevaluate libpam-systemd systemd-sysv dependency ordering (746578)
Package: tech-ctte
Severity: normal
Control: block 883569 by -1
Dear CTTE,
In 746578, the CTTE decided that the dependency be swapped
to systemd-shim | systemd-sysv in order to prevent systems
from being upgraded installing systemd.
This argument should be moot now. Either dependency is satisfied
on systems now, so an upgrade won't change anything.
More importantly, several packages now require just systemd-sysv. If
apt is told to install libpam-systemd and such a package in the same
operation (especially in a chroot I'd say, since that's where neither
shim nor sysv is installed), it may fail to resolve dependencies
because it picks systemd-shim first and fails to replace it with
systemd-sysv later. See #883555 for an example.
I thus opened bug 883569 against systemd, but mbiebl would like to
get permission from the you first.
> Package: libpam-systemd
> Version: 235-3
> Severity: important
>
> libpam-systemd depending on systemd-shim first causes severe trouble with
> resolving dependencies, as APT picks systemd-shim but then later sees a
> package which needs systemd-sysv and fails.
>
> I understand the order was necessary for preventing upgrades to stretch
> from migrating to systemd, but with the packages now widely installed,
> this should not be a problem anymore, as the dependencies are satisfied
> already, so APT won't switch them.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: buster/sid
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (900, 'testing'), (800, 'unstable'), (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'testing-debug'), (100, 'experimental'), (1, 'experimental-debug')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 4.13.0-1-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_IE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_IE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_IE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
Reply to: