Re: systemd-fsck?
Bas Wijnen wrote:
> On my system, I see systemd-sysv being pulled in by libpam-systemd, which is
> required by network-manager and policykit-1.
>
> libpam-systemd will accept systemd-shim instead of systemd-sysv as well, but
> it's listed later, so the user has to manually select it if they want to keep
> their init system. In a long list of "this needs to be changed to make the
> upgrade work", it's very easy to miss that it happens at all, and even if a
> user does see it, I don't think we can expect them to understand what it means,
> and go check if there is an alternative.
>
> I think it would be good for libpam-systemd to list systemd-shim first. That
> way, installations that already have systemd for some other reason (like it
> being the default from d-i) will still work, but it won't switch existing
> installations to a new init system unexpectedly.
Having libpam-systemd depend on "systemd-shim | systemd-sysv" will not properly
handle systems that already have systemd installed but not systemd-sysv.
> That being said, I don't really care much about the init system; sysv worked
> fine for me, and now I apparently have systemd and it doesn't seem to cause
> problems either.
Given the lack of a massive number of new bug reports against either
systemd packages or the desktop packages depending on them, I suspect
that's the general result, as well: uneventful upgrade to a system
that's still sysvinit-compatible, where we can deal with bugs as they
come up.
- Josh Triplett
Reply to: