Re: Tentative summary of the amendments
On 21/10/14 at 20:09 -0700, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > Q2: support for alternative init systems as PID 1
> > =================================================
> > A2.1: packages MUST work with one alternative init system (in [iwj])
> > (if you are confused with “one” here, it’s basically fine to read it as
> > “sysvinit” instead. See this subthread for a discussion about
> > this)
> I believe Ian's intended reading is that a package that depends on
> uselessd | systemd (but does not work with sysvinit) would be allowed by
> his proposal.
Thanks for pointing this out.
I clarified this in the blog post: http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/blog/?p=845