On Tue 11 Nov 2014 at 07:33:44 -0500, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Brian wrote: > >Placing the bar so high at "clean" for the reason given is unwarranted, > >especially if preseeding with > > > > d-i base-installer/includes string sysvinit-core > > > >is done. Then systemd-sysv is cleanly removed during the install of the > >base system and there is no dependency hell to be considered. > > > >Having removed the reason we can now not just lower the bar but dispense > >with it entirely. Installing and booting with sysvinit-core becomes a > >non-issue. > > > Perhaps you should read bug 668001
We both took part in a similar discussion at https://lists.debian.org/543e5f34.6060...@meetinghouse.net When you re-read the thread you may want to revise your misplaced advice. > For Wheezy, if attempting a clean install of systemd: > > if you use debootstrap unstable foo --include=systemd-sysv > --exclude=sysvinit > the install fails > > For Jessie: > > The reverse fails. It is a complete success here with the beta2 d-i and preseeding. As dpkg says: considering removing systemd-sysv in favour of sysvinit-core ... yes, will remove systemd-sysv in favour of sysvinit-core It's the happy init camper's dream outcome with no downsides. > I'd be quite happy if the installer were capable of a clean choice of init; > at them moment that bug stands in the way. And it's not just a matter of > applying the (recently) contributed patch to debootstrap. One has to also > build an alternate installer. > > But maybe, you haven't been paying attention. My attention has been sufficient to see that any reasons you gave for desiring a "clean" choice over what is on offer are dead in the water. #668001 may not be the only thing standing in the way; I wish you well with your alternative installer. -- 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/20141111153328.gh3...@copernicus.demon.co.uk
