[Touch-packages] [Bug 1357713] Re: Use essential init package to ensure that an init system is present

2015-04-09 Thread Martin Pitt
This is the case now in vivid, init is essential and ensures that systemd-sysv or upstart-sysv is installed. ** Changed in: init-system-helpers (Ubuntu) Status: Triaged = Fix Released -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1357713] Re: Use essential init package to ensure that an init system is present

2015-04-09 Thread Sworddragon
Theoretically https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/init-system- helpers/+bug/1436691 is a duplicate of this report but the first symptoms haven't revealed this. And as I have figured out later that this happened because init is not essential I haven't remembered this ticket. -- You received

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1357713] Re: Use essential init package to ensure that an init system is present

2014-09-24 Thread Harry
Martin Pitt wrote: Right, that will switch the default init to systemd. If you want to experiment with that, you can do either that or boot with init=/bin/systemd (you don't need both). Well I did test that with my high-end setup (Intel Core i7 4790 + Asus Z97 Sabertooth + Samsung 850 Pro SSD)

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1357713] Re: Use essential init package to ensure that an init system is present

2014-09-23 Thread Martin Pitt
First of all, for the removal of upstart, one must install package systemd-sysv. Right, that will switch the default init to systemd. If you want to experiment with that, you can do either that or boot with init=/bin/systemd (you don't need both). This is indeed not officially supported yet as

[Touch-packages] [Bug 1357713] Re: Use essential init package to ensure that an init system is present

2014-09-23 Thread Sworddragon
ubuntu-minimal depends on upstart and ifupdown, so supposedly you removed that. This is really not a supported configuration. If this is not officialy supported I recommend to make ubuntu-minimal essential in this case. At least removing it is currently a valid configuration. Debian has a new