Hi all, I updated the wiki as best as I could. Thanks again for all your help. -- aldemir
On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 at 21:31, Thorsten Glaser <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Feb 2026, Andrew Bower wrote: > > >On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 09:49:39AM +0300, Aldemir Akpinar wrote: > > >> (Reading database ... 27088 files and directories currently > installed.) > >> Removing systemd (257.9-1~deb13u1) ... > >> systemd is the active init system, please switch to another before > >> removing systemd. > > > >I don't believe you needed to include 'systemd-' in this command line - > >you do that as a second step after reboot, as before. > > Ah, oops. I install systems with debootstrap these days and always > change inits before booting into them, so I forgot. > > >I don't think this is necessary. Sorry, I think the wiki page needs > >rewriting. > > Yes, definitely. > > >I have never done this - perhaps it was necessary in the > >past. It seems the optimal instructions are a hybrid of the "at > >installation time" and "at runtime" instructions. > > No. We truly need separate instructions per Debian release, > especially as apt also changed (it doesn’t show the “Yes, do > as I say!” prompt any more, just fails to do what the user > requested, and the manpage explicitly doesn’t say that the > fix for that is --allow-remove-essential, and the maintainer > thinks that’s okay… 😾 > > >> I used to do an apt-get install sysvinit-core, reboot, and apt-get > >> remove systemd. It always worked from jessie to bookworm. > > > >Sorry for having directed you to the wiki when it merely added confusion > >- I didn't realise how out of date it was. > > Yeah, we really need updated instructions. Probably best > also include o-s-s, as that has become good as mandatory > with at least bookworm. > > >> I feel like debian doesn't care about choice anymore, becoming just > >> another redhat clone. > > Yeah… we literally got told that Debian “was never about choice” 😿 > > >ifupdown is already "Priority: important" so I'm not sure why you didn't > >have it already installed. > > New installs won’t have it any more, they now use network-manager on > one kind of installs and netplan(?) or something else even worse on > others (one is servers, the other is desktops/laptops, I forgot which > is which, dropped it and installed ifupdown as I wanted). > > Note that trixie has udhcpc-base instead of isc-dhcp-client by default > as the latter is EOL since 2021 and not security-supported in trixie > any more, but this will also cause trouble and changes. The ifupdown > maintainer tries his best to get things working, but this really needs > patches in udhcpc, which the udhcpc maintainer refuses to even discuss. > 🤬 But in trixie at least, you can still install isc-dhcp-client on > systems you don’t want these experiments on. > > Point of order, I don’t think this is a bug in the package, and we > probably should control-close this. However, we NEED a working wiki > page, and I’d like to suggest another improvement: the Description > field of the relevant binary package(s) should gain a paragraph to > say that a normal apt-get install will not work with them on systems > currently booted with another init, that that is expected, and that > the wiki page (URL here) contains the necessary procedure. > > I think this could even get into stable-p-u. > > bye, > //mirabilos > -- > Yes, I hate users and I want them to suffer. > -- Marco d'Itri on gmane.linux.debian.devel.general >
