On 20141111_1200-0500, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 11/11/2014 11:38 AM, The Wanderer <wande...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > Other people subscribe to a meaning of "default" which, e.g., assumes > > only that systemd will get installed as PID 1 unless some action is > > taken to prevent it from getting so installed. That seems like an > > entirely reasonable interpretation, at least to me. > > Absolutely correct. The concept 'Default' implies that there are > *alternatives*.
Systemd can be installed, and yet not functioning, if the address of some other piece of code is planted in PID 1. Of course, much more than a simple storing of an address value in a specific location in RAM is involved in a successful switch of the *running* init system. Tanstaafl's argument is faulty, IMO. Apt-get can be made to modify the information on disk so that the next boot will install in RAM an init system that is different from the init system under which apt-get was run. This is 'inefficient' but much less 'inefficient' than trying to convince intelligent people of a falsehood thru right reason, which is, in the end, a total waste of eveybody's time. I suggest that the word 'default' not be used any more in this discussion. It serves only to obfuscate the nature of the problem. -- Paul E Condon pecon...@mesanetworks.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141115233738.gb27...@big.lan.gnu
