Re: is this sensible?
On Mon 30 Jun 2014 at 03:49:36 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2014-06-29 12:52:40 +0200, François Patte wrote:
> > Le 29/06/2014 12:35, Brian a écrit :
> > > If that is what you really want to do you are not going about it in
> > > the right way.
> > >
> > > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2014/05/msg01042.html
> > Not sure of what you mean here...
> Not sure either what Brian meant.
We've had "Why should I install systemd?" and "OK but I am wondering why
gthumb (and its dependencies) needs to install systemd". I thought a
thread discussing the issue might be of interest.
> > If it is that systemd is unavoidable, [...]
> The systemd package is not needed by gthumb's strict dependencies
> (by "strict" I mean that you need to disable recommends explicitly).
> But you may have other packages that, once upgraded to satisfy
> dependencies, now depend on systemd (I would not be surprised).
* policykit-1 depends on libpam-systemd
* libpam-systemd depends on systemd-sysv or systemd-shim
I don't think systemd-sysv is the issue here but installing systemd-shim
allows the installation of sysvinit-core.
> You could first try to remove all GNOME-related packages (since some
> major GNOME components now depend on the systemd package[*]), then
> upgrade your system to unstable, then reinstall gthumb without
I'd just say "yes"; preferably after a backup.
It has been noted in the past that getting work done without a fuss and
running unstable do not always go hand-in-hand.