Re: Comments on introducing a new Essential package: base-init?
On 2012-02-08 21:03 +0100, Roger Leigh wrote:
> This is regarding Bug #645540 ("Essential" package conflict between
> sysvinit and systemd-sysv).
> sysvinit is currently Essential. In order to permit the replacement
> of sysvinit with an alternative init system, I'd like to propose the
> creation of a new Essential package "base-init", with a Depends on
> "sysvinit | init", where "init" is a virtual package provided by all
> packages providing /sbin/init. This would be provided by sysvinit,
> systemd, upstart, etc.
Assuming they all provide /sbin/init, they need to conflict with each
other, right? In that case, switching init systems has the dangerous
effect that apt will remove the current provider before unpacking the
replacement, leaving a window where /sbin/init does not exist. Sounds
rather dangerous to me.