Hi folks, One issue that has held back adoption of upstart in Debian - or even people trying it out - has been that the upstart package conflicts with sysvinit, which is Essential: yes. This conflict is not accidental; upstart has always been intended as a drop-in replacement for sysvinit, not something that would sit alongside it. In the long term, I think it's clear that we don't want users to have to have multiple init systems on their machines. However, in the short term this conflict has remained much longer than was ever intended - upstart was added with the expectation that the Essential: yes bit would eventually be dropped from sysvinit.
The only way to address the Essential conflict for the jessie release seems to be to move the contents of sysvinit to a new package, and make sysvinit a metapackage that depends on an ORed list of the possible providers of /sbin/init. E.g.: Package: sysvinit Essential: yes Pre-Depends: sysvinit-core | upstart | systemd-sysv Package: sysvinit-core Replaces: sysvinit (<< 2.88dsf-44~) It seems to me that this is the correct course of action regardless of which init system we choose to adopt as the default in jessie. I have proposed a patch to implement this change in bug #728566. Do others here agree that this is the correct course of action? Is there another solution I've overlooked for this issue? Cheers, -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
