On Sunday, 24 February 2013 at 14:06, Otavio Salvador wrote: > > DISTRO_FEATURES contains the init script *style* that you want: sysvinit or > > systemd. These are not mutually exclusive so specifying both will get you > > both directly in packages that support both. I'm still not convinced we > > need to split these out into separate packages, the size impact is > > practically negligible and the dependencies are effectively redundant as > > you'll have trouble booting without an init system. Instead the postinsts > > should wrap the initscript fragments in checks. > > > The size impact it not negligible; specially for initramfs images but > what concerns me even more is the upgrade path from previous users of > meta-oe systemd.
I obviously didn't make myself clear - the size impact is negligible when you're talking about just the init script - the dependencies on systemd/updatercd could be recommends at most, as the postinst scripts could check what init system they have before calling any tools. Either way a rescue image that boots using busybox init shouldn't have systemd, clearly. > I'd like to have an upgrade path. Well, strictly speaking oe-core itself doesn't have an upgrade path to consider… Why can't any distros that shipped with meta-systemd (or just in meta-systemd) have an include that injects the RPROVIDES/RREPLACES/RCONFLICTS for the packages that they enabled? Ross _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
