On 20.06.2015 11:38, Riccardo Boninsegna wrote:
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 11:33 PM, Didier Kryn <k...@in2p3.fr> wrote:
Le 18/06/2015 17:23, Laurent Bercot a écrit :
Absolutely. Why enforce exclusion when you can have a choice ?
Make a "currently active" vs. "inactive" switch, I don't know the
Debian/Devuan terminology, and allow users to install both.
There's already an exemple of that kind: you may have xdm, gdm3, kdm and
lightdm installed; you decide which is the one in effect by running
dpkg-reconfigure any-of-them.
Yup, assuming the kernel-to-init code understands chained symlinks it
would be relatively easy to port all init systems to the
"alternatives" feature :
The generic name is not a direct symbolic link to the selected
alternative. Instead, it is a symbolic link to a name
in the alternatives directory, which in turn is a symbolic link to
the actual file referenced.
Perhaps alternatives are not designed for this, it seems like bad idea
for reliability. There are always dangling, casual, insane symlinks in
/etc/alternatives for one reason or another. They don't affect
trustworthiness only because there are nothing critical here.
--
sa
_______________________________________________
Dng mailing list
Dng@lists.dyne.org
https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
