Julien, On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 03:39:43PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: > So one thing I think we should ensure is we don't end up uninstalling > systemd without an explicit user choice. > > The "init" package has the "Important: yes" control field which as I > understand it tells apt to behave like "Essential: yes", except for not > trying to install the package if it is not installed. > > That's not quite enough for our purposes, because apt would still be > allowed to replace systemd-sysv with sysvinit-core, but maybe > systemd-sysv could get that flag as well? > > Julian didn't seem to find the idea crazy when we brought that up on > irc.
Thanks. The aim of preventing accidental removal of systemd is very reasonable. However, using this approach the hurdle you create even to a user who really wants to uninstall is pretty high. Few people will continue having seen the 'You are about to do something potentially harmful' warning. I think the effect we are after is rather closer to that of apt-mark hold systemd or dpkg --set-selections systemd hold. Once held, uninstalling the package requires a specific request to apt. But I realise this approach will also prevent upgrades. Mark