Re: Bug#886238: Please introduce official nosystemd build profile
Simon McVittie writes:
> On Sun, 07 Jan 2018 at 00:27:15 +0100, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
>> sysvinit probably only stays in testing because systemd
>> depends on sysv-rc for compatability with LSB init scripts...
>
> I think it did during the default init system transition, but it doesn't
> any more.
>
> sysvinit-utils is still Essential: yes, because it contains binaries that
> were historically part of the Essential set; *that* keeps src:sysvinit
> in testing. There are plans to make sysvinit-utils non-Essential by
> moving pidof to a new Essential package built from src:procps (lots
> of packages blindly assume that pidof exists, so adding dependencies
> doesn't seem feasible) and adding dependencies for the few uses of the
> other sysvinit-utils binaries, which have been OK'd in principle by the
> maintainer of src:sysvinit, but haven't happened yet.
Oh, right, I somehow ended up thinking the LSB init script bits from
lsb-base were part of sysvinit, but they aren't.
> sysv-rc and initscripts are both present on about 72% of installations
> that report to popcon, even though systemd-sysv is present on about 78%
> of those installations and sysvinit-core is present on less than 2%.
> I don't know what's going on in the other 20% - surely they can't all
> be wheezy or older? Perhaps some of them are chroots or containers with
> no init system at all?
If you look at the version graph at https://popcon.debian.org (leaving
out intermediate versions):
1.28 (sarge) : 16
1.41 (etch) : 740
1.46 (lenny) : 2442
1.49 (squeeze) : 7912
1.56 (wheezy) : 27436
total submissions : 195697
This makes about 20% running wheezy or older releases.
Ansgar
Reply to: