Re: systemd situation in Jesssie

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
From: Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 00:25:26 +0100
Message-id: <[🔎] 20140518232526.GA17353@copernicus.demon.co.uk>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 18052014193330.56d7ddf98a26@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk>
References: <[🔎] 5377A358.1040100@aol.com> <[🔎] 87tx8oi670.fsf@turtle.gmx.de> <[🔎] 20140517194013.GR4120@sid.nuvreauspam> <[🔎] 20140518174339.GZ17353@copernicus.demon.co.uk> <[🔎] 5378F5DF.7000708@rail.eu.org> <[🔎] 18052014193330.56d7ddf98a26@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk>

On Sun 18 May 2014 at 19:43:19 +0100, Brian wrote:

> The substantive part of my mail debunks the claim that GDM necessarily
> imposes a specific init system. It is correct to say that gdm3 depends
> on libpam-systemd, but installing systemd-shim leaves a sysvinit system
> without any change in PID 1.

This is the situation at present with unstable. The future is less clear:

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/05/msg00469.html

  https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2014/05/msg00532.html

Reply to:

References:
- systemd situation in Jesssie
  - From: Martin Vegter <martin.vegter@aol.com>
- Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
  - From: Sven Joachim <svenjoac@gmx.de>
- Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
  - From: Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com>
- Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
  - From: Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>
- Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
  - From: Erwan David <erwan@rail.eu.org>
- Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
  - From: Brian <ad44@cityscape.co.uk>

Prev by Date: Re: FSF condemns partnership between Mozilla and Adobe to support Digital Restrictions Management
Next by Date: Re: users groups for in person work revisited?
Previous by thread: Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
Next by thread: Re: systemd situation in Jesssie
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread