On Mon, 25 Jul 2022 16:08:28 +0200 Michael Biebl <bi...@debian.org> wrote: > Am 25.07.22 um 14:05 schrieb Mark Hindley: > > > It has been suggested that changing the dependency to > > > > systemd-standalone-tmpfiles | systemd-tmpfiles > > > > would help the packaging system usually find the correct solution and reduce the > > number of unexpected surprises users are reporting. > > > > With this change, on a systemd installation the dependency would already be > > satisfied and therefore noop for APT. > > This is not correct. It would make the bootstrap phase more brittle as > outlined by ansgar. So this is certainly a no-go.
Indeed it would be wrong. Also the justification doesn't seem correct: simply installing the 'systemd' binary does NOT switch the init system, so it's difficult to see how it could 'significant problems' in and by itself. > I hate to repeat myself: add a Recommends or Depends on > systemd-standalone-tmpfiles to sysvinit-core to help apt choose the > right solution for such non-standard configurations. On top of that, when building images debootstrap provides --include/-- exclude switches to also do that. -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
