Marco d'Itri writes ("Re: Is missing SysV-init support a bug?"):
> On Dec 31, Simon Richter <s...@debian.org> wrote:
> > These are running stretch, and I would like to upgrade them without
> > breaking my existing scripts, which assume sysvinit with runlevels
> > (including one-shot runlevels).
>
> Somebody having legacy scripts which assume sysvinit and that they do
> not want to change does not make "sysvinit preferred over systemd" as it
> is being argued.
There is nothing "legacy" about sysvinit, at least if by "legacy" you
mean "is going to go away" or "should be migrated away from" or
something.
Ian.
--
Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own.
If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
