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

sysvinit: moving the contents out of the Essential: yes package?

Hi folks,

One issue that has held back adoption of upstart in Debian - or even people
trying it out - has been that the upstart package conflicts with sysvinit,
which is Essential: yes.  This conflict is not accidental; upstart has
always been intended as a drop-in replacement for sysvinit, not something
that would sit alongside it.  In the long term, I think it's clear that we
don't want users to have to have multiple init systems on their machines. 
However, in the short term this conflict has remained much longer than was
ever intended - upstart was added with the expectation that the Essential:
yes bit would eventually be dropped from sysvinit.

The only way to address the Essential conflict for the jessie release seems
to be to move the contents of sysvinit to a new package, and make sysvinit a
metapackage that depends on an ORed list of the possible providers of
/sbin/init.  E.g.:

Package: sysvinit
Essential: yes
Pre-Depends: sysvinit-core | upstart | systemd-sysv

Package: sysvinit-core
Replaces: sysvinit (<< 2.88dsf-44~)

It seems to me that this is the correct course of action regardless of which
init system we choose to adopt as the default in jessie.

I have proposed a patch to implement this change in bug #728566.  Do others
here agree that this is the correct course of action?  Is there another
solution I've overlooked for this issue?

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: