Hello,
I think this bug has a lot of dev and ops misunderstanding. It's not
surprising dev folks think the postinstall hack is good enough, but from
an ops perspective it very much is not. Rather than trying to argue
that point, let's just move ahead with solving the core problem
Woody Suwalski terraluna...@gmail.com (2014-10-27):
You have mentioned that there is a trivial late_command workaround
for systemd. Could you please point to the how-to?
Well, quite obviously:
preseed/late_command=in-target apt-get install -y sysvinit-core
I would somewhat expect people
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 05:57:30 +0200 Cyril Brulebois k...@debian.org wrote:
Kenshi Muto km...@debian.org (2014-10-17):
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
I made a patch to see each Depends:/Pre-Depends: and
respect exclude parameter.
If init Pre-Depends:
So what kind of testing would help to get this included in Jessie? Can I
offer assistance?
It strikes me that an awful lot of the screaming about systemd would die
down a LOT if there were a definitive way to install a system with
systemvinit-core rather than systemd -- as opposed to having
On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 13:09:19 +0900 Kenshi Muto km...@debian.org wrote:
At Fri, 17 Oct 2014 05:57:30 +0200,
I myself don't matter about systemd, but
I heared there was a bootup problem when one created a root
system for container (such as LXC) with using debootstrap.
(though I'm not sure about
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
I made a patch to see each Depends:/Pre-Depends: and
respect exclude parameter.
If init Pre-Depends: systemd-sysv | sysvinit-core | upstart,
exclude=none gets systemd-sysv.
exclude=systemd-sysv gets sysvinit-core.
Kenshi Muto km...@debian.org (2014-10-17):
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hi,
I made a patch to see each Depends:/Pre-Depends: and
respect exclude parameter.
If init Pre-Depends: systemd-sysv | sysvinit-core | upstart,
exclude=none gets systemd-sysv.
At Fri, 17 Oct 2014 05:57:30 +0200,
Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Kenshi Muto km...@debian.org (2014-10-17):
Thanks for the patch but…
I'm really uncomfortable adding that kind of patch this late in the
release cycle, especially since the “I don't want systemd” “problem”
is trivially solved with a
shawn wrote:
Package: debootstrap
Version: 1.0.39
Severity: normal
Tags: d-i
if you use debootstrap unstable foo --include=systemd-sysv
--exclude=sysvinit
the install fails
dpkg: regarding .../systemd-sysv_44-1_i386.deb containing systemd-sysv:
systemd-sysv conflicts with sysvinit
Package: debootstrap
Version: 1.0.39
Severity: normal
Tags: d-i
if you use debootstrap unstable foo --include=systemd-sysv
--exclude=sysvinit
the install fails
besides having this annoying for testing, esp with systemd-nspawn,
having this work will
be a prerequisite for having systemd be the
10 matches
Mail list logo
