Re: End of hypocrisy ?
On Thursday 07 August 2014 14:21:45 Brian wrote:
> On Thu 07 Aug 2014 at 08:31:08 -0400, AW wrote:
> > On Thu, 07 Aug 2014 15:03:50 +0300
> >
> > David Baron <d_baron@012.net.il> wrote:
> > > Offered for upgrade today are a bunch of old-style?? init components,
> > > initscripts, sysv-rc, etc
> >
> > Are these the Sid installation upgrades? I generally run 'testing' on
> > most of personal machines. I've had no issues with converting from
> > sysvinit to systemd. Also, I've had no problems using both 'old' style
> > init and 'new' style systemctl commands interchangeably to interact with
> > services.
>
> sysvinit (2.88dsf-53.3) unstable; urgency=medium
>
> * Non-maintainer upload.
> * Since the new "init" metapackage has taken over the role to ensure an
> init system is installed at all times, drop the Essential: yes flag from
> sysvinit and demote its priority to optional so this package is no longer
> pulled in on new installations on Linux. Make sysvinit depend on "init" so
> this new package is installed on upgrades.
> * Provide a fallback SysV init binary in the sysvinit package which can
> be used to boot the system via init=/lib/sysvinit/init even if systemd is
> the default init system and /sbin/init is provided by systemd-sysv. *
> Demote the priority of sysvinit-core to extra so it is no longer installed
> by default on Linux.
>
> This is part of the transition to systemd plan.
>
> https://lists.debian.org/87mwc9gfsw.fsf@xoog.err.no
>
> Also, for those who care, libpam-systemd's Depends: line now has
>
> systemd-sysv | systemd-shim
Should the dsf-53.3 versions be installed or does it matter?
systemd-shim is NOT installed (had installed on previous 32 bit system as I
said). Or are these obsolete, being handled by systemd-sysv so can/should be
removed or does it matter?
Wish there were not so many bugs around systemd. No objection to it as long as
it works.
Reply to: