On Mon 15 Dec 2014 at 13:13:22 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: > On Sun, 2014-12-14 at 17:01 +0000, Brian Potkin wrote: > > On Thu 04 Dec 2014 at 12:02:27 +0100, Svante Signell wrote: > > > > > + It is also a good idea to install > > > + <systemitem role="package"> sysvinit-core, sysvint and sysvinit-utils > > > + </systemitem> as the first packages when upgrading. > > > > What is gained by doing this? If pinning is used sysvinit-core is > > installed. > > Are you sure? I'm not. Pinning is a help for apt and aptitude to resolve > which packages to install.
Here we both have in mind a Wheezy system with sysvinit (an essential package). I am sure that the pinning will lead to sysvinit-core being installed because of the dependencies of the init package. For a system with upstart sysvinit is not installed (they conflict). Such a system will not end up with systemd-sysv because of the pinning and the dependencies of the init package. > > If sysvinit-core is installed before a dist-upgrade is done > > why bother with pinning? > > Other packages might install systemd-sysv by mistake? As was the case > with libpam-systemd before the Depends: of libpam-systemd was changed to > "systemd-shim | systemd-sysv"? Pinning helps you to avoid such mistakes. Installing sysvinit-core first is fine if the Wheezy system has sysvinit to begin with; the dependencies of the init package are then satisfied. It would be a bad idea for upstart users to install sysvinit-core before doing a dist-upgrade. > > Aren't sysvint and sysvinit-utils already on the system and upgraded > > without doing anything special with them beforehand? > > Not sure about this either. Are you? I think you should become sure. Regards, Brian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
